Why can't we get a hotfix/update every week instead?

Why can’t we get a regular hotfix/update every week instead?
Cubase PRO 8 has a lot of bugs so at least for now, why can’t we get smaller more frequent unsupported/unofficial hotfix-updates regular? It will not make Cubase PRO 8 work any worse then today. You can anytime uninstall the hotfix if you don’t like it or if it doesn’t work for you.


Don’t get me wrong I really like Cubase PRO 8 so go back to Cubase 7.5 is not option for me. I just want some smaller hotfix updates that fixes some very irritating bugs example not saving VCA faders state, scrolling-bug Up & Down in the Mixer view etc.

http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=230&t=73347
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=230&t=72892
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=231&t=70302

I don’t know, just a thought! :wink:

Best Regards
Freddie

While it would be nice to have issues addressed that frequently, all one has to do is remember the first update to iOS 8 that Apple put out last fall—it effectively broke people’s iPhones!

I run a business based off of Cubase, and could not risk this kind of catastophe.

I’m running a business too still I’m not afraid to try out a “hotfix” from Steinberg that you can uninstall if it doesn’t work for you. IPHONE OS is another story and much bigger operation compare to a program like Cubase PRO 8.


Hotfixes are unofficial updates so you don’t need to install the hotfix if you afraid that your computer going to explode on you. But let us other advance users that do want to try out hotfixes have that option. We do that at own risk, and its a very small risk. And if you get seriously problems you can always uninstall and reinstall Cubase PRO 8 from scratch again. So no worries.



Best Regards
Freddie

some pre-release or “Release Candidate” cycle would be nice IMO, those ones whose prefer (or need some) bugfixes instead of stability (hey stability cmon it’s Steinberg, I know I know :smiley: ) … https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle#Pre-release_.28Release_Candidates_dance.29

I completely agree with Freddie on this. Frequent small releases:

  • Allows clients to benefit from a continuously improving product
    Lets the development team get quick client feedback
    Gives clients confidence their issues are being addressed
    Keeps the development team focused
    Promotes modular thinking and test automation

The list could go on. I hope steinberg can catch this wave some day.

Btw I’d settle for a release every two weeks.

regular hotfixes at the beginning of the product cycle to address the multitude of bugs always found in initial steinberg releases would be great. then slow it down once the product is fairly stable. as it is if you cannot use the product in its current state you wait for months to be able to use it. this seems counter intuative to the idea of “upgrading”. the only solution seems to be “stay ahead of the curve by staying behind the curve” and not upgrading till the end of the product cycle. again that policy defeats the whole product cycle model. the only REAL solution is for the developer to insure the initial release is more stable/bug free than the current model. push development ahead by 3 months.

I was hoping that when Steinberg adopted their new naming convention (for the CB 7 series, if I remember correctly) that added the 3rd digit to the revision identifier we would see frequent “hotfixes”. Even on a daily bases if they had one ready. But, weekly would be a huge step forward and could be a game changer for SB if they did it. Even monthly would be a game changer IMO. It can, and should be done like this. :slight_smile:

Regards :sunglasses:

Steinberg did implement a hotfix system many years back where they released beta versions with a swifter release frequency. I felt it worked very well and they fixed many small bugs quickly with feedback given rapidly by the users. Right now though I couldn’t opt into such a scheme because I need Cubase to be working and stable at all times. In fact I haven’t even upgraded to 8 yet because of existing ongoing projects - I’ll be running them side-by-side pretty soon though I hope.

Mike.

+1

Any business that has a critical dependency on software has to thoroughly test it against ALL other software to be used with it, to make sure the new version doesn’t break anything. The more complex the software, the more tests need to be run, taking up more time.

For each update, the whole suite needs to be re-run, plus new tests designed for the new functionality. There is a point where the tests, including definition, setup, running and evaluation, may take up too much of, or even exceed, the time between updates.

Businesses cannot afford to ‘suck it and see’ by doing real work on an untested setup, as it can lead to unscheduled stoppages to evaluate and remedy ad-hoc problems, leading to customer frustration, as well as loss of earnings. The time you spend on fixing, is time that is not earning income! Opportunity cost thinking required here.

If hobbyists put a reasonable $ value on their time, they would also come to the conclusion that too short an update cycle time entails too much risk, or takes up too much time to test.

Well - there are some problems with the fast hot-fix approch.

First of all - it remains to be seen if an fast cycle (weekly) is even possible. Knowing an bit about software develeopment, I can say it’s not as simple as “fix only that thing”. Most times what seems to be an simple fix, can have serious consequences in seemingly unrelated area’s of the program. For example - an simple metronome click “repair” can have influence on the whole timing process of the program, resulting in off-timed clips, unreliable audio timing, MIDI timing, and maybe even errors in the notation part (and probably much more area’s).

Secondly - Cubase has grown far more complex than in the day’s weekly hot-fixes could be released, making fixes is not as easy as in those day’s. The result is that an longer release cycle is simply needed.

Third - an fast hot-fix cannot be tested on every hardware combination that is around. There is simply not enough time to do that! The result could be an solution for some people, and an complete wreck for others. It would be an kind of Russian roulette. People that are complaining about the supposed “beta state” of Cubase, could learn the meaning of a REAL beta- or even alpha state of software.

Taking the above in account I rather have an slower, but more tourough, state of fixes. That means not often, but more stable and reliable. Even “normal” fixes give some problems on certain systems (it is virtually impossible to test on every possible combination of hardware).

In short - I see no reason to speed up an patch process, if the result is lower quality control. This probably gives more problems than it would solve things.

This is just my opinion, not based on hard facts (I am not an musical software developer). However, I think I am not that far off…

Sure stability is very important and Cubase PRO 8 are very stable already. If I have any real major issues that I don’t have at the moment I can always go back and use Cubase 7.5 that I have installed also on my setup.

But under all my years working with this professional since 1996 I never accounted a Studio or other producers using 3 years old version of DAWs or softwares just to be safe. We can sometimes use legacy softwares like Virtual Guitarist 2 in the setup but that something else. All people that I know that work with this professional use the latest softwares, Videos drivers and up to date technology and OS. Of course we are not installing Windows 10 release candidates but we still use Windows 8.1 x64 and Windows 7 x64, and not XP32 and Cubase SX3.


Best Regards
Freddie

I’d have to differ here, Freddie. The studio I worked updated Nuendo once in six years and stayed on Windows 2000 on the same rig the whole time, for the very reason of stability. And I’ve heard over and over of studios that are stubborn this way. It all depends, of course, on the studio and how they use the DAW.

Having said that, it’s no excuse for how messed up C8 is. I shouldn’t be forced to not use the newest version–which is what’s happened with this one.