development status?

trogluddite · 24 Jun 2010

MichaelBenjamin wrote: i would be glad to pay for a future upgrade

Same here; my current licence has been an absolute bargain - I've paid far more cash for much less useful (or enjoyable) software many times - I'd gladly put my money where my mouth is if it would help to get SM development moving along.

Andrew J · 24 Jun 2010

Me too.

mwvdlee · 27 Jun 2010

I'd be willing to pay for major new features.

Right now though, there are some significant issues that need to be fixed first. The ones that hurt my products the most are listed in my signature 😉. I can consider S|M a bargain if it works as promised when I bought it. Right now it doesn't.

ccpurno · 27 Jun 2010

I would also be willing to pay to keep sm development running 😉

DigitalWhiteByte · 27 Jun 2010

I think it's a common thought, even for a reappraisal of investment and hours spent to understand, I think for a while more experienced users could be a real deal. Malc could influence what we expect for the future, at least to understand if the project is an extension (even paying for this), to consider a few important requests for the product offer development in a professional manner.

mwvdlee · 27 Jun 2010

Come to think of it; this "pay for new features" business model is a VERY risky proposition. The time Malc can spend on development is finite; paying for one feature means less development time for others. You can figure out how badly this can go wrong by yourselves.

Although I'd be very tempted to pay for certain bugfixes, I fear in the long run it would hurt S|M to do so.

trogluddite · 27 Jun 2010

mwvdlee wrote: "pay for new features" business model is a VERY risky proposition

Certainly - I wouldn't propose users getting into auction style 'bidding wars' to have their personal favourite features added. Nevertheless, I would be prepared to pay a small subscription for access to update downloads, for example. It's very hard to know what business model would work best without knowing more from Malc - for all we know, he could be 90% through coding SM v2.0 as we speak - OTOH maybe we have another two years of minor bugfixes.

Nu Audio Science · 28 Jun 2010

mwvdlee wrote: I can consider S|M a bargain if it works as promised when I bought it. Right now it doesn't.

I would like to see where it says that you would get that which you didn't get ?

SM is a great application and does exactly what it says on the website We have all had a lot of free updates to the app especially those like myself that were early adopters

I don't think threads like this are really needed because when Malc has something to say i can tell you he will do so If he hasn't said anything for a while that doesn't mean he has stopped development it just means he is busy

NAS

Jay · 28 Jun 2010

Yep i too would love to see a great many things added to SM, especially the events system and believe we will one day get it! Quiet spells where Malc is concerned usually mean as NAS said - he's hard at it and that's always good news for us!

SM is a really fantastic development app! i used to see it as a fantastic toy but, that's all changing with the current more stable state it's in nowadays! As for value for money - exceptionally.

I know it's taking a long time to get SM to where we all want but, whats that saying about Rome?

look at cubase my friends, 21 years in the making and still far from perfect 😉

I don't agree with the pay for features model but i would wholeheartedly agree that we should all pay again for SM2 when/if it comes since it won't be an update, rather a whole new app, and if it was upgradable with addon's or pluggins I would be happy to pay for them ( lol that's paying for features)

Fingers crossed 😀

Andrew J · 28 Jun 2010

I think the earlier statements on this thread were nothing to do with "pay for features" - more an expression of customer enthusiasm and a willingness to inject more money into the product, whatever the development model.

Nu Audio Science · 29 Jun 2010

OK then can i suggest something

We set up a project Everybody who wants to help the devs chips in and buys a new licence each month This licence is then given away in a competition (best blah blah built with the demo i guess)

More money for the devs More users for the forum too

I would say this is a good way to help out the devs

NAS

Acrobat · 2 Jul 2010

Nu Audio Science wrote: OK then can i suggest something

We set up a project Everybody who wants to help the devs chips in and buys a new licence each month This licence is then given away in a competition (best blah blah built with the demo i guess)

More money for the devs More users for the forum too

I would say this is a good way to help out the devs

NAS

that's cool

rl · 2 Jul 2010

well, the original question remains unanswered.

Nu Audio Science · 2 Jul 2010

Actually the original question has been answered If you where going to get anything else publicly it would have been stated already by Malc 😉

NAS

infuzion · 3 Jul 2010

Nu Audio Science wrote: If you where going to get anything else publicly it would have been stated already by Malc

I don't think Malc reads anything but the Bugs forum anymore to be honest. But I do take the lack of answer as an answer.

Nu Audio Science · 3 Jul 2010

Well i wouldn't assume anything 😉 He read the Hidden modules thread in the registered users area

So lets not jump to conclusions here OK

NAS

stw · 9 Jul 2010

I think one aspect of the development question is the concern about the future of SM. Is SM a software which will be updatet in features and not only bugs and also adjusted to newer standards or will it stay on the point of development it is. Unfortunately there is NO answer about this anywhere. A Forum called "Ideas and requests" and some ancient rumors about SM2 could lead to the assumption that there would be a really extended SM in future but reality shows a different direction. Most updates refer to bug hunting and no feature improvements. There's even no insight about how many devs are working on SM. It seems Malc is the only one. What can a one man show achieve? There're times where one beta follows the next and then there's silence for months. Does it mean Malc is hacking day after day to get out the next major release, or does it mean he has to make a living from another business and sooner or later SM will become obsolete? We can only guess... Whatever happens is ok. But what matters on the other side is when due to a lack of communication or clear statements people are misleaded in their expectations. And that concerns far more than the software itself. It's about how much time you invest in developing with SM. I myself started with SM because i planned (and still do) to release some commercial stuff in future. It would be a shame if after months or years on working on a project i have to realise that it never comes to a serious release of my work because SM stopped to be updated or simply industrial standards have have overtaken SM capabilities. (Other already made that experience). Much of that issue refers simply to man power. If there's not enough people to do the job it simply can't be done. On the other hand we have a very confident experienced and supporting user base in that forum which obviously wouldn't resile to cope with additional fees. So people are willing to help! Maybe it's time to think about combinig ressources and starting a new business plan for Malc. If that's not on the agenda i (and i guess others too) would appreciate a more distinct communication about what will happen from Malc. He's the one in charge and his ideas and plans are the ones that will be realised. And too many wrong expectations about SM could lead to a backdraft which harms outsim more than some not implemeted features.

just my 2 cents

trogluddite · 9 Jul 2010

Great post stw - really summed up the situation well. Your point about being 'overtaken by industrial standards' is especially important - already people are having trouble with Steinberg hosts because of them dropping support for pre VST2.4 plugins. I can plan around features that SM doesn't have because I know that they're not available - but not knowing whether my plugins will run on other people's machines, or whether they will be disabled by some crummy new Windows or VST 'feature' is far more worrying.

I do think that this is maybe a big cause of the 'log jam' in terms of adding features - it does seem that Malc has had to spend a lot of the effort in recent updates simply addressing stability issues with hosts. I've no doubt that his work on this will have been hampered by a lack of co-operation from the bigger companies who make host software - Steinberg seem particularly unhelpful in this respect, despite VST being their standard! One also has to wonder how the tie-in with FL has skewed his business plan - they would naturally expect some influence on OutSim in return for their licensing money.

This must all be very tricky for Malc - I've no doubt that he would love to be honest about the situation with his most loyal users (he has always been very responsive and helpful when I've needed customer support) - however he has to be very careful what he says because internet 'rumours' and making hard-to-keep promises have the potential to be more damaging to OutSim than his current 'no news is good news' policy.