- - Beta testing for new versions is non-existent.
- Older versions are known to be more stable while the workflow/operation issues are growing in # each version.
- The timeframe for known bug fixes is usually 60 days+.
- The fixes aren't thorough/don't address issues (some bugs have been around for years).
- Many of the critical 'features' need improvement/don't work as intended (ASIO guard, channel strip chain)
- They bloat the UI, limit user customization, make many things less intuitive (7.5 instrument rack, departure from cubase 6 ASIO meter).
- Documentation on ASIO functionality is not thorough and unavailable to the public.
Cubase 7-7.5, in it's current state, works great for some people. And 7.0 helped me make some great music. But there are intrinsically broken functions that go unfixed for months at a time (IF AT ALL!).
Why are we forced to put up with this if we want to use this application? What if the people at Steinberg, as well-intending as they may be, were actually developers that took an active interest in making the program better for it's customers? Not by charging them for untested features but fixing the broken ones that have been in the app for more than a year?
Lydiot wrote:The point appears to be taking responsibility for a product that is sold advertising something it doesn't live up to, particularly if getting that corrected requires spending more money.
What do you think is going on with Cubase 7?