C4 updates?

[TheRealRoach]

Hi guys,

Just looking for the final word on what the final version of Cubase 4 is.

Is 4.5.2 from Sept 11th '08 it?

[LEX]

4.5.2 is the FINAL version.

No more updates.

You can PAY to update to C5.

LEX

[Daryl]

So in a historical context, C4 is the only DAW on the planet that can't do Solo/Mute. Shocking. I'd be asking for a refund...........

D

[BJF]

Let me do that on your behalf....

At least I'll get the money. :)!

B

[LEX]

C4 and possibly N4 are the only DAW's on the planet with broken basic functions.

Pretty much the history and future of SB.

Basic functions work if you are lucky, they are fixed "whenever" and new features are introduced broken, half working, or break other parts of the program.

As the program gets more complex, the worse (I imagine) it will get. I still think that C5 won't be REALLY ready until middle 2010, and C5 64 bit won't be ready until C6 middle development (which translates to 2013).

With 30 more people coding dongle calls, who knows what kind of system you will need from NASA to run 10 midi track and 10 audio tracks in the next versions.

LEX

[TheRealRoach]

*snip*

As the program gets more complex, the worse (I imagine) it will get. I still think that C5 won't be REALLY ready until middle 2010, and C5 64 bit won't be ready until C6 middle development (which translates to 2013).

With 30 more people coding dongle calls, who knows what kind of system you will need from NASA to run 10 midi track and 10 audio tracks in the next versions.

LEX

I would imagine that it would be better to have a basic system with basic functionality that works 99.5% of the time (the last 0.5% of odds left to cosmic control :P ), than a complex system with complex possibilities that works 80% of the time. Wouldn't crap loads of people flock to the reliable system?

And secondly, about the dongles. Isn't it true that a lot of coding is wrapped up in the dongle itself, thus acting as a ball and chain for the performance of the application? Wouldn't an application that is dongle free have a greater potential for efficiency and stability? Like Logic? It would be a great test to perform. One C4 with the dongle, and another designed to function without a dongle - and i'm not just talking about some cheesy cracked copy, I'm talking about, "lets forget about all the dongle crap, and pool all of those extra man-hours into stabilizing a great program instead of being paranoid about theft. Innovation, not intervention, right?

Imminent rant warning:
I think Apple Logic's choice was a wise one. They no longer have to dedicate time and money to developing a secure program with a dongle. The old-school challenge/response or serial number on the box will suffice as a deterrent. Also the people who would buy the software will buy it regardless of whether or not its available for free as a cracked version. Buying legitimate copies of software = tech support from both your software and hardware manufacurers... but in the case of steinberg it buys you... :sulkoff:

The thing is that putting a hypothetically un-crackable USB dongle security is not going to change the habits of the loyal customers. It will not affect their decision. The people that are on the fringe of either buying or cracking will not be affected in their decision either as they are not the pro studios that use the software 8+ hours a day anyway. If something is too hard to steal they'll either buy something can afford, or just crack whatever the hell they want. All they need is basic recording/sequencing functions anyway.

So what this means is that dongles for DAWs don't change the buying market in a significant way. It does not secure - no punn intended - any new sales from pirates that can't crack the software as they will just move somewhere else/easier. And in fact you could say it is detrimental to sales if the performance of the program is constantly tapped by a constant pinging of the dongle - which, ironically, only the loyal users will notice because they're the only ones that take the program to its full potential.

[messianic]

The official word actually did not say one way or the other.

I can't find the thread at c.net, someone help out?

[MattiasNYC]

The official word actually did not say one way or the other.

I can't find the thread at c.net, someone help out?

Yeah, it did. In the thread at Cubase.net it was clearly stated that no further Cubase updates were planned. (http://cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=796483&sid=179f86ed047cd043b41d45d9cfc0f331#796483)

There you go...

[messianic]

Here's the quote:

Hi all,

currently no update for Cubase 4.x is scheduled. It´s true that we are working towards a bigger thing.

Not scheduled doesn't mean not planned.

[LEX]

Here's the quote:

Hi all,

currently no update for Cubase 4.x is scheduled. It´s true that we are working towards a bigger thing.

Not scheduled doesn't mean not planned.

Okay, you keep waiting and let us know how it turns out.

LEX

[messianic]

..and thanks for the link km2

[MattiasNYC]

Here's the quote:

Hi all,

currently no update for Cubase 4.x is scheduled. It´s true that we are working towards a bigger thing.

Not scheduled doesn't mean not planned.

First of all, thesaurus.com has the following two entries come up under "schedule"
Main Entry: schedule
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: plan for one’s time
Synonyms: agenda, appointments, calendar, catalog, chart, diagram, docket, inventory, itinerary, lineup, list, order of business, program, record, registry, roll, roster, sked, table, timetable
Antonyms: disorganization

Main Entry: schedule
Part of Speech: verb
Synonyms: agenda, arrange, calendar, card, catalog, chart, docket, inventory, itinerary, list, organize, plan, program, register, roster, routine, slate, table, time, timetable

So they're essentially the same thing and you're splitting hairs at best (and one wonders why..... ) But even supposing they're not the same, why then would they answer with a negative and not a positive? Why not say that they had planned an update?

Come on man, the truth is that Cubase users are more "lemmings" than are Nuendo users. SB knows that they can get away with this. They won't plan (schedule) an update unless there is sufficient noise from the community. From Nuendo users there were enough noise for them to at least say they'll give out an update, much later. But just look at the Cubase user base and see how they're reacting to the C5 announcement. The concept of getting what you paid for is out the door as soon as new eye-candy is available.....