There is simply no big software package without bugs.
You are absolutely right: When the “switch off” function of notebooks started to get implemented as a software-function even THIS did not always work.
We will continue to see more of that type: With the introduction of AI there will also be AIrr (Artificial Irrationality). Inavoidably. Errors alway come hand in hand with intelligence. They are a byproduct of it.
Which is - of course - no excuse for bad quality assurance (Steinberg has improved in that area obviously).
Cheers, Ernst
Can´t say anything bad about Cubase, the only DAW with zero crashes in 2 years(C9.5 now) for me. I can´t say the same about others, i.e Live, PT, FL…
I only wish they would simplify the process of adding and setting multiple MIDI controller for everything, since one can have many controllers these days as they´re cheap
in alot of things Cubase is ahead of other DAWs. Cubase is best all around DAW for both Audio and MIDI.
Yes, cubase is still behind with ARA2, long startup time, crash on exit, buggy MediaBay and Preset browser, Time Stretching is not as intuitive, version 10 got right clikc menu messed up, and many little bugs.
but it has VariAudio, powerful midi and score editor, control room, built in virtual instruments, samples track, comes with decent content for music creation.
of course each DAWs have their strengths and weaknesses.
That said, I have been using Cubase since it could record and play only Midi and was called “Steinberg 24 Track”. I still use it and love it. 
Startup time with loads of plugins is less than 15 seconds here (SSD drive), zero crash on exit here so far (latest version 10), and the only problem regularly bothering me with media bay/preset browser, is that it does not preview Rex files in orgignal tempo (which is really a no go from my view).
Just saying, because some issues don’t seem to concern all users in the same way.
FWIW, I don’t actually use other DAWs, so I can’t really comment. But I think this thread is pointless and trolley. Either post reasons why other DAWs are more advanced or not. Generalized vague statements like “I know so and so left to work at so and so” don’t contribute value.
I have only had the opportunity to look at FL Studio and am impressed with the fact that it’s not the Fruity Loops drum machine it was a long time ago and seems like a fully fledged DAW. But I haven’t actually used it to offer a discussion. The tester I tried crashes like crazy on my Intel based i7 Mac and I haven’t bothered going on their forums to figure it out yet, so am not planning on looking into it further any time soon.
I came from Pro Tools, Logic and S1. Looong time PT and Logic user.
And I must say: its the opposite - all the other DAWs langs behind Cubase 10! this is a fact.
Cubase 10 has all the nice features that I were missing and which I know from Studio One - event effects, more inserts, vsti pics, file browser e.g.
Simple drag volume automation like pro tools is also now possible. And Cubase´s Mix Console and visibility management are a dream!
S1 is obsolete for me now.
Cubase is THE winner in all areas - great Midi Editing, Composing, Mixing, Film Score, Sound Design etc etc…
C.
So the other DAWs are better but you don’t want to have to learn how to use them. Doesn’t make sense to me.
Ok cubase has all the extra bells and whistles but, Cubase is the most expensive DAW, and doesnt even have the essential: ARA2.
Reaper is 10 times cheaper and has ARA2.
Why did Steinberg decide so late to start integrating ara2 ?
And it’s still not integrated
Sorry buddy. Sounds like you’re just trying to find stuff to argue about.
Some of the folks in this thread and who post elsewhere in the forum are pro engineers, composers, sound and audio post designers/editors who have worked in the field four decades or more. These are people who have managed to raise families, win and lose fortunes, on the earnings or lack thereof through their careers. These folks are seasoned pros who know the tools they work with.
The tools that were designed for a limited number of highly specialized and highly skilled people 40 years ago can now be purchased at a tiny fraction of the cost.
For $3,000 a person can buy gear that accomplishes what would have cost $30,000 in 1979, which amounts to 100,000 USD in today’s dollars
Bells and whistles are not being discussed here. It’s about core midi and audio functions in a mature program. And, to belabor the obvious, if you really knew that was better, you would be using it to make music.
end rant. beam me up Scotty.
It is not a winner regarding remote controller functionality. At the best you can map midi to some functions with a crappy xml file. Competition have java programming api’s. Cubase is stone-age and have been so for a very long time. I think we can thank Yamaha for that.
Compare the MCU functionality of Cubase vs Studio One and it’s lightyears ahead. Studio one can’t access more than 8 parameters. As a new user of Pro I’m finding the controller features really good, coming from Logic/Studio One.
From what I’ve seen of Cubase mapping you can have pages/modes for each controller too which is great.
A big negative tho, is having more than one MCU type device Cubase likes to spread the controls across them. If one is a Mackie controller and the other a synth using the MCU protocol then that ain’t good as you want them to show the same, not odd/even pages.
The thing about daw is easy as this one: there is no better daw. I’m in cubase just because it was the last attempt to find something without to many horrible stuff happening or lacking function. As I found there is no such a thing I stay here , at least I remember the shortcuts better having been the last one i learned.
Every daw has got its own good thing, but the other side, any daws has got things there are not just bad, but indeed horrible, Cubase has got lots of horrible things…like any other.
I can name the worst freezing since ever, the lacking of the touching mode automation (in cubase touch is latch and latch is latch). Cubase can also be called “toolbase” because of the useless number of tools no daw uses anymore. The useless effect track. The worst solo function ever. The impossibility to create a feedback in the same group, missing lots of shortcuts…I could be going on and on…but I could do the same for any other daw.
Honestly, Cubase is great for mixing, scoring, recording.
But have you tried Bitwig? I just got into it and some things about Cubase makes me really mad. I actually laugh out loud when learning Bitwig just because of those “what the hell” moments all the time, “this is the way it should be done”. Im realizing how fast and easy a lot of things can be done in Bitwig that takes so much time and effort in Cubase… if even possible.
Just to mention some things: macro controllers (impossible to do in Cubase). The vast variety of modulation of VST parameters. Speedy workflow. Integration with eurorack/cv.
Don’t get me wrong, Cubase IS awesome for recording and mixing. And Bitwig sucks at recording a band… or scoring. 
Cubase has a lot of legacy code and features, patheticly bad Hitpoint detection (that acts differently in each update more or less). 20 year old Recycle has better hitpoint detection than Cubase 10 ffs… I think Cubase is stuck, in its traditional way. Real Innovative workflow and features are lacking imho. Right now its mostly copying what others can already do, and mostly not on par. Vocalign as an example.
And still, there are reasons why I use Cubase and not the other traditional daws. Will be using it less and less for making music though.
** Off topic **
Carlo, Atari ST my friend! Rock on. Man I love that thing! Still have my STE in my garage.
Having tried Live, FL and Reaper, Traktion, man Cubase is a dream. I didn’t get indepth, just midi recording, editing and audio and effects. But to me, Cubase is more logical in it’s design. I’m digging Pro 10, just moved up for the 30 year anniv. Fantastic.
I do wish it had skin capabilities like Reaper, that’s the one thing I like about reaper. Didn’t care for the ugly menu systems lol (as if that matters).
Haha, more often then not I have the feeling getting more done in the old days using Cubase 1 on my Atari 1040ST
No audio, only having to focus on the basics using MIDI is not as crazy as it sounds!
More on topic:
the Cubase team in Hamburg should take the competition like Studio One more seriously. Even after all these years and countless updates, I’m still waiting for an intuitive graphical user interface. Very little has IMO happened here that is worth writing home about.
Studio One is a new product, they haven’t got the additional baggage of supporting a 30 year old product. It’s not easy to overhaul software which has to also retain many features for legacy users. If Steinberg were to reskin on top of whats running it would only create more problems as you’re adding an additional layer on top of the existing software.
I imagine the dev team look at all DAWs very seriously, but they’re also doing their own thing - if you like Studio One then use it, if you prefer Cubase then you just have to accept that it’s a product of it’s environment. The grass is always greener on the other side, of course.