If you don’t have 13 GB of free space on your application drive then you have an OS issue there buddy. This will affect application performance and stability.
Why is it really bad programming? Do you know the reason it needs 12GB to install? If you do maybe you could enlighten us all to it and explain why it is really bad programming.
You stupid!
You think the sounds comes out of thin air? Search for “*.vstsound” files on your hard drives. That’s the format of the sound libraries used in Cubase.
Me stupid!
You’re trying to install the update and Cubase installer tells you it needs 13.74GB?
That didn’t work at first but somehow it worked.
Bad programming.
So Steinberg has done it again! As much as I love Cubase when it’s up and running, the installers from Steinberg are horrible and has been for years. You have to look closely at EVERYTHING or you might miss something you have to go back and correct later. That’s far from ideal …
If you’ve been around Steinberg programs for a while you know all this so you proceed with baby steps. When you have done this a number of times you’re used to the process and you don’t see how fragile it really is.
Would be great to see some paradigm shift when it comes to Cubase 9.0
Anyway, it’s been a great day and I had the chance to call not one but two people stupid! I hope it stays at that.
Yes really. If the OP couldn’t install the update because the installer needs a minimum of 13GB to operate but he has only 3 or 4GB free then that’s a problem. The 13GB threshold could also be there because Steinberg is forcing the user to free up some space because perhaps they know that Cubase won’t perform optimally with less.
Your available disk drive space can have a lot to do with performance. If you have limited space available your swap space is effected. If you have limited free space or a highly fragmented disk drive it takes longer for your processor to manage the processes that are running.
As embarrassing as it is, that very point is one of the main reasons I don’t upgrade/purchase as often as I might otherwise. That plus not being confident there is any reliable way to “roll back” except to revert to the pre-update imaged drive. Theoretically that’s not a problem, but in practice it means that much/all of the work done since the image was created is lost, or at least a pain in the tarkus to retrieve/save.
So I keep on going always a few versions behind, until there is a “must have” in some future update.