Public beta testing for Cubase

Public beta testing for Cubase?

  • yes
  • no

0 voters

I think Steinberg should implement public beta testing for Cubase. Present quality testing at Steinberg is just not working well enough. Maybe there is not enough testers, maybe not enough different configurations, maybe testers don’t test all functions… In any case, quality testing is failing, too many bugs passing by. The ongoing issues with graphics in mixer are just too much. It is 7.0.4, dammit. Half a year passed since release, and still people are reporting issues with such a basic things as simply showing graphics on their screen properly.

Please Steinberg, consider this seriously. Current Cubase is 7.0.4, but actually it should be 7.0.beta4. OK, sell it as BETA, if you need some income from us, and let those who want it as beta buy it as prerelease. I’d buy prerelease, just for fun, to try it out. But be fair, don’t sell it full of holes and pretend it is a full release. At least if you call it BETA, people will not complain about it. You will get constructive response, and will be able to fix it all, without pressure from unsatisfied customers. Then when you have it all ironed out, then call it a proper release. It will be so much better for both customers and for your business.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

Open and closed beta [edit]

Developers release either a closed beta or an open beta; closed beta versions are released to a restricted group of individuals for a user test by invitation, while open beta testers are from a larger group, or anyone interested. The testers report any bugs that they find, and sometimes suggest additional features they think should be available in the final version. Examples of a major public beta test are:
In September 2000 a boxed version of Apple’s Mac OS X Public Beta operating system was released.[3]
Microsoft’s release of community technology previews (CTPs) for “Longhorn” in January 2005.[4]

Open betas serve the dual purpose of demonstrating a product to potential consumers, and testing among an extremely wide user base likely to bring to light obscure errors that a much smaller testing team might not find.

i’ll be honest.
There’s enough moaning on this forum without having moaning before the proper release gets moaned at.
Steinberg have an incredibly advanced piece of software running on infinite computer configurations and we’re all complaining about colours, labels and loading times.

previous versions of cubase have been relatively stable out the door, from memory 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5 were all fine, the last major mess was 3.0, which contained some major code changes if i remember correctly.
i’m sure we’ll see several years of stable releases…

of course id prefer public beta tests for major releases

Not so true unless we are using cubase for play Tetris. We experienced several Major issues.

Edit: I agree about the incredibly software running in all kind of different setups.

Aloha guys.

Another approach would be to not spend $$ on Cubase
but to spend some time.

When a new product ships, just spend a lil time (not $$$)
waiting for the trial/demo version.

Then if it works for you, buy it.

If not, no $$$ were lost. Only a lil time.

{’-’}

silly idea if you ask me because the competition will know exactly what they are up against and even try to plant idiots to create issues that are not there to cause Steinberg problems , it couldn’t work , to many people complain about small things that don’t work the way they like and in my world that’s TUFF SHIT

Are you using ‘public’ as a synonym for ‘open?’ I suppose so… So I voted no to your poll.

I think, based on the resources they appear to be working with it would not be possible to do a good job of administering a large open beta program. The user base is too diverse in terms of experience with the app.

A closed beta would be good. They certainly might be doing that already during the pre-release time.

Yes, indeed.

I’m all for a closed beta testing program for registered users, with some criteria based on OS/Hardware to be elected for the program. That would be a good thing if the manage to run it properly.

It’s weird that Steinberg is owned and controlled by Yamaha (so resources should not be a problem) and we are getting such a poor quality control when it comes to these updates. 7.0.4 is a mess.

For me, 7.04 works just fine. But I agree on the idea of having some kind of public beta. I don’t believe for a second that it opens for competitors to catch up. There are so many more factors that influence the choices of which functionality to include, and those choices are made on a much longer time frame.

On the other hand: I have tried saying that for years to the software company where I work, and almost everyone there says it would enable competitors. So I’m in a minority. But that doesn’t make me wrong :slight_smile:

It might, I don’t think it’s Steinberg that has to worry, at least for people who want a swiss army knife type daw. Anyway, they have never seemed too concerned about that.

A public beta wouldn’t change a thing.

Pretty sure, they know about the most flaws in Cubase, at the time of release.
BUT, they have to release in this unfinished state, due to management decisions.
I.e.: they have to generate cash flow.

One way out would be, to reduce the number of products
and concentrate all resources on one product.
Don’t think, Nuendo brings a lot of income, these days …

Jan

Colors…that makes hard to read plugin name. What about distorsion sound, first + 1.2dB (everytime), then +6dB (real time export) ? What about crash on loading project on 7.0.4 ? What about lost sound when insert external plugin ? And so on…

Yes, Cubase is most great DAW in world. But when 7 version comes out and major problems ocured, I start wondering: can I still trust this software ?