What I said is that the job description of a product manager is “balancing” all above mentioned parameters and prioritizing them.
With all due respect, this is not what I said.
And you are of course free to argue that this is all individual preferences, but I don’t really see how one can make a compelling argument against video and omf/aaf import being essential in an audio post app. Yet for a audio-post-centric app certain things must work in order for there to be faith in the product/company. Like I said, N4 is a very good product, and it seems that N5 is better still. At the end of the day then we’re looking at Steinberg as a whole in order to make sense out of it. So it may not be as cut and dry as you portray it.Īnd be that as it may, you are in effect confirming what many have said regarding the issue of managing resources (i.e not laying all the blame on the beta team). Well I find it somewhat ironic of you to state that one either agrees with your opinion about it or don’t have a clue, then say that if one doesn’t one is guilty of “black/white thinking” essentially.īut be that as it may, I seem to recall other having pointed do different ways of developing products. I also think Steinbergs approach has improved over the last year. I’m still waiting for this stuff to be resolved before I delve into N5.x… That’s lost revenue…Īll in all though Nuendo is a very good product.
give Nuendo customers 1 Cubase license so that they can run either off of one dongle (to deal with leaping frogs).be more proactive and communicate better what has been fixed and what has not (as the release notes doc is clearly not entirely… illuminating).more communication about when those updates can be expected to come out.I think some of the concerns could be resolved fairly easily: That begs the question of how on earth it was tested? And why the release notes document isn’t more specific so that a potential customer (me for example) can know exactly what to expect. The fixed one apparently “masked” the “new” one. And that functionality is key for those working in post.įurther more, and ironically similarly to a previous issue, the release notes document stated that an issue with OMF imports from FCP had been resolved, and Fredo now stated that a “new” issue had been “uncovered” after this older one had been taken care of. And now we just got 5.1.1 and it still has those issues. … except it still had OMF and video issues. And this time Steinberg did so fairly promptly…
Manufacturing packaging and media + distribution takes time out of the actual coding so of course there will be a point where the company says “let’s release as it currently is and offer an update later to fix outstanding issues”. As a customer I understand that the initial release of a new version (i.e v5.0) will contain bugs. Key features will undoubtedly then be video playback and OMF/AAF import. You can argue this back and forth as much as you want in defense of what the status is, but to the end consumer it looks like this: Steinberg has a premium product and claims it is targeted toward people working in Audio Post production. What happens with the provided information is subject to a truckload of -let me call it- parameters, which are sometimes not always “in sync” with what the user wants. Beta reports and provides repro’s that’s their job description.
Which is the very opposite of a user complaining that “his most important bug” is not fixed with the highest priority.Īnyone who runs his/her own business -with success- has no other choice than agree with the above.Īnyone who presents it as being “black & white” doesn’t has a clue what he/she is talking about.Īnd for the record, I think it is safe to say that 95% of all bugs and design issues have been found and/or reported by beta. So, having to make these choices, taking into account all these parameters makes that there is no “black and white”/“fixed or not fixed”, but a careful weighing of the issues and balancing the resources to get something done within a certain time, budget and priority. So anything a product manager decides is per definition the wrong decision for “someone” just by the sheer fact that it is his job to pake decisions. Within these restrictions he needs to prioritize stuff, taking into account that a small bug can take more time than a big one, that there is a considerable risk factor in touching some area’s (that it breaks something else), that an “action” might jeopardize future development and that some “re-designs” are already planned in the future. The product manager gets x-amount of development time, in x-amount of time, for x-amount of money. The “problem” is called product management. But I am curious to what do you believe IS the root of the problem?