Mac OS X 10.11 El Capitan status update on compatibility

I understand the excuses Steinberg is giving, I strongly disagree although I’m trying to be understanding but I just can’t help but feel mad towards both, Apple for breaking things with every update they do, and Steinberg for not caring enough.
The fact of asking the customer to stay with an older version is in my opinion so so sad, as if someone tells you, can’t drive your car on newly paved roads, they could break your car. Unacceptable.

There should be a law forcing companies to have an obligation making sure there software is fully functional with new operating systems before they get released full stop.
Until such law “if it will ever exist” I urge everyone that is not happy to express anger and disagreement about it.
Thank you.

I have to say that Ive always been a sucker for an upgrade but as Steinberg state-wait until the problems have been sorted-I mean do you REALLy need to upgrade to El Captian? (Dreadful name BTW) Is it REALLY that Important to go from a comfortable fire in to a frying pan nightmare?? Mmmm-I feel a song coming on! And thats what we should all be thinking about rather than a new OS which lets face it isn’t going to make that much difference anyway. I rest my case:-)

Hmmm. As someone above said, surely that depends on whether you use your Mac for things other than Cubase? There are a number of very useful updates to El Capitan (crap name - agreed!) and some things (wifi drop, iCloud sync) that never really worked properly for some under Yosemite.

Additionally, if you are immersed in the Apple world you need El Capitan to ensure you get maximum compatibility between OSX and iOS 9.1.

I suspect something is being lost in the German to English translation but I find Steinberg’s response lacking.

Well this seems to be the crux of the issue. Where do you get the impression that this is possible?

I’ve spoken with numerous OS X and iOS developers, and they’ve all complained about the same issue: the early beta releases are not good indicators of what will and will not break, so they can’t prepare for GM based on those. Fixing things that break during the beta cycle may be completely wasted work, since Apple may fix it themselves at any point. Alternatively, things that seemed to work earlier in the beta cycle will break later, even only at GM. Some issues are in core OS services where Steinberg “fixing” it would mean creating a separate code path just for that OS release where they kludge around that issue. That is not healthy software development.

I’m sure many of us think of Steinberg as a big company, because it’s one of the major DAW houses and Yamaha is their parent company, but the truth is this is a niche market and the companies that work within it really have to manage their limited resources. Throw into that the fact that realtime audio applications are one of the most challenging to maintain through OS updates, and there’s no scenario where this works 100% of the time. Ever. I would love compatibility on day one also, but Steinberg can’t play whack-a-mole with beta APIs, and Apple isn’t going to deliver GM months before release.

I’m a software developer and have developed for Mac and iOS. That’s not how it works. Developer builds are out there for a reason and companies use them. It’s not a “huge waste of time” by any means – it SAVES time from being late with an update when the release comes out.

Sure, Apple (or any other company releasing a new OS) can change something between builds, but there’s also a specific roadmap communicated at WWDC, stuff known in advance (new libs added, documented changes to existing APIs and services etc.) that has to be adopted early. It’s not like Steinberg has to re-architect large parts of Cubase to keep up with any new beta. And even devoting a couple of programmers would make a big difference in their update coming sooner.

Other, more diligent companies, already have updates out, for equally or even more complex programs (including DAWs).

I think we speak of different kind of time-saving here. I mean developer man hours, not time to release. I agree developing for the beta cycle will mean being ready earlier for the new version. And yet, I don’t think they should do it.

This.

One final thought and then I have to go: I think there’s also a perception issue here which comes from the fact that Steinberg is very careful about OS updates.

They had the big disclaimer up not to use Windows 10 all these months, but in my own tests there were no issues, so I jumped on it early. Working ten hours a day on it, it took me weeks to even notice what it was they were warning about, and then it was really easy to work around until Microsoft fixed in on their end. Similarly, C8 works on my MacBook Pro with El Capitan just fine. I have no idea what the issues are, but the MBP is not my work computer, so I could’ve missed something. So do NOT take my word for it.

But I think some other DAW companies would probably just say “oh well” and add the new OSs on the list of supported systems and just consider the issues like any other bug. I think people are aware of that and probably don’t update to El Cap before a critical session with any of those programs. At least I hope they don’t.

However, it would help if Steinberg communicated a little more clearly what the actual issues are. It’s good to give the overall “don’t use it yet” warning, but people who are more eager to check out the new OS should have a better idea of what they should expect not to work. The general doom and gloom warnings make it look like Steinberg’s software completely breaks every time, which is not true.

Agreed. For me Cubase 8.0.3 worked just fine on El Capitan - it was my Scarlett 18i6 interface which wouldn’t play nicely - that’s why I personally had to roll back to Yosemite. Focusrite however say the issue is with Steinberg, not Apple…

Why not blaming Apple instead ? Why does Apple screw everything that is not in the Apple Cult Ecosystem every time they release an update ? … :wink:

And between us: what’s so urgent or exciting about 10.11 ? (I’m still looking for this on another machine I have installed it… )

That being said, I also concur that some other DAW softwares tend to be faster in their updating schedule…

Cheers,
Rob

Hi Ed,

Thanks for clarifying here in the forum when we can expect to see some news on progress with the challenges that you have uncovered with respect to the latest update in the Mac OS X implimentation. I have no doubt in my mind that much of the issue list is with the early to market feature improvements and bundle software security fixes model that the two COTS Operating Systems vendors are sadly now hell bent on pursuing, and what that places on the sholders of third party applications developers such as your organisation behind the scenes.

Hopefully the takeaway for you and the management team of Sternberg is that you need to communicate some more detail as to the challenges and assign some time frames or goals to achieve compatibility is something that you really need to do a lot better with future news releases, especially if you wish to retain your level of user product satisfaction.

All the best with the efforts to resolve the compatibility issues and I look forward to some positive and affirmative plans resulting out of the Monday discussions.

Ron Southworth

Fo those not running Steinberg software exclusively, here’s a list compiled by sweetwater.com that lists the current state of El Capitan compatibility for most major DAWs.

My goodness. My how many more times does this need to be said? BECAUSE not all of us have a dedicated (very expensive) Mac for our (very expensive) Cubase software. Some of use use our Macs for other, equally valid pursuits.

Well even more reason not to upgrade to the latest OS if you’re using your machine for other vital tasks. The marginal benefits of upgrading are usually outweighed by the misery that accompanies being a guinea pig.

I can’t imagine for one moment that you know better than me if I should upgrade my OS. Or if your idea of a “marginal benefit” matches mine.

FWIW, I upgraded, it didn’t work, I rolled back to Yosemite.

Anyway you cut it, Cubase Pro 8 costs a chunk of change and you would expect it to work with a widely previewed, advertised and available (for months to developers or anyone particularly interested) major new operating system.

Waiting til release day, then doing (or at least communicating) nothing for three weeks, then doing nothing again, then publishing a list via Sweetwater of companies who also didn’t get their act together, is poor.

If you’re happy with that then more power to you.

Well you upgraded, it didn’t work and now you’re back on Yosemite so actually it appears that I did know better than you :laughing:

Next time listen to what the moderators say about when to upgrade and you’ll do better in the future.

Good luck

You’re so right. Thank you.

Testing your software products with early preview versions of a new operating system is very useful to detect major issues. Steinberg does perform such testing, of course.

Minor issues, though, will crop up even in later preview versions, as the OS manufacturer is constantly tweaking the new operating system’s behaviour.

Also, not all of a new operating system’s known issues are solved by its manufacturer with the first official release version.

I would imagine that it is not easy to decide which is more harming in the long run:
Recommending to upgrade to a new operating system, while there are still unresolved issues, or recommending to refrain from upgrading, even though you might disappoint users.


I agree that transparent communication is a good thing, and helps to create understanding for tough decision making.

Best,
Dirk

Hi Dirk,

I concur :slight_smile:

This is the first statement that I’ve seen from Steinberg that mentions any testing prior to the OSX public release - in fact one of your colleagues specifically said that was not the case, so thanks for clarifying.

I totally understand the predicament that an OS upgrade can put you in, but as you say, transparent communication is a good thing. The thing that didn’t sit well for me and perhaps others (discounting the fanboys) was Steinberg’s apparently casual approach to the whole issue, and not for the first time, regrettably.

Bluntly, the impression formed - perhaps unfairly, was that Steinberg had done nothing prior to release, were not exactly rushing to find a solution, and treating its customers like mushrooms…

Thanks for the reply and good luck sorting things.

any update? Can we get an estimated date to have a compatible release?

Thanks