Hi Luca,

luca.mg:

camoscato:

AndrewAction:

Admittedly this may reak of being a "hindsight is 20 20" but it comes from reverse engineering my opinion that if something, destructive to existing users workflows like the Smart Tool, was introduced in the future, Avid would have all of this new "Xxxxx Tools" settings defaulted to OFF. Then document how to turn it on and what turning it on achieves.

They won't do this because they don't think the new "features" are "destructive to existing users workflows," or else why would they have introduced them?  Playing devil's advocate for a sec, if they were to do this it would be an admission that the new "features" have failed.

This is one of the main points here, Avid not admitting the mistake(s) with MC 5

I'm not certain Avid sees MC5 as a mistake.  They might agree that the Smart Tool had a few issues to be ironed out, but I haven't seen anybody from Avid budge on the CTRL key change, and they've explained the UI customization as a work in progress.

So I won't be holding my breath waiting for them to default the ST to off and put a note in the ReadMe about how to turn it on, because from their point of view it works.

ciao,
Carl 

I would agree that specifically in the case of the Smart Tool, the issue would be solved if "clicking TC ruler disables smart tool" worked WITHOUT the smart tool randomly re-enabling itself. Fix the random re-enable problem and the ST discussion/complaints will end.

Ciao Carl,

camoscato:

I'm not certain Avid sees MC5 as a mistake.

well I don't mean that MC 5 is a total mistake, but that some of the new features are mistakes; I don't even mind if ST is on by default, as long as I'm able to make it disappear like Douglas envisions  the CTRL key changes are the major problem and Avid will never admit it's a mistake, they should fire whoever is responsible for designing this big mess and step back to the MC 4 code, the manager(s) who hired the above software designers and gave the green light to this (counter) revolution should get the pink slip as well, so in a collective attempt to save everyone's job we're seeing the great CTRL key mess whitewash, while talking of the UI customization work in progress, they could have waited for the new customization tool to be ready for the debut instead of releasing the alpha version of it. On the other hand I welcome the audio improvements, but the shortcomings of MC 5 are far more than the benefits of it, and yes, I'm well aware that Avid doesn't see MC 5 as a mistake, as they are responsible for the mistake, and they aren't keen to admit it.

luca.mg:

they should fire whoever is responsible for designing this big mess and step back to the MC 4 code, the manager(s) who hired the above software designers and gave the green light to this (counter) revolution should get the pink slip as well,

Hi Carl & Luca:

                                                       In my opinion Avid as a company seems to be hemorrahging cash ! Have any of you read their business reports over the last two years ? I found it very interesting reading indeed ! Although it is true they are improving somewhat recently, the overall trend is still slightly down as far as I can tell from the little I can find online. I can't find where there is a real CEO ? There is a C.O.O - I will have to re-read a little. You know what I mean ? A *traditional President who's main responsibility is to showcase the company's vision and course over the next few years. The other NLE companies are quite open about where they want to go in the next year, but Avid company seems a little vague on where it's going. I think Avid's navigational compass could be spinning a bit. I've been trying to find some information which discusses the specific direction Avid wants to go, other than "hold on and enjoy the ride" kind of statements written on this forum. I am NOT trying to speculate on Avid products thank you I understand Avid employees can't come online and discuss in detail what's next over the proceeding few months to year (s), but I would have thought they would have made some kind of an official statement by now. I do hope they have an idea where they will be going *based on user feedback from independent Beta testers outside of the company ? I find the company communication with the customer to be very poor ! I find it so weird and creepy the way changes are made. For example; was there a memo or some kind of ReadMe publication made available, which gave a "heads up" forward view that major changes were being made to the upcoming MC5 UI and functionality before MC version 5.x was released ? Perhaps such a form of communication could have saved some post editors their jobs ? Is it just me, or is there some special internal information loop high profile editors can get from the company, which we cannot ? Forgive me if I read as though I'm totally clued out here, but ever since I became an Avid customer, I have been in the dark and never really understood how this company operates. I've never been able to get any information out of Avid, and trying to communicate with the company is almost impossible. This has been my experience.

Mark

 

camoscato:

So I won't be holding my breath waiting for them to default the ST to off and put a note in the ReadMe about how to turn it on

Who asked for that Carl?  I suggested, after reading opie177 's post, that details of all the settings etc a user needs to do to customise MC5 BACK as close to working the way they were used to with a MC interface be put in a Readme or Knowledgebase article.

Rightly or wrongly many users want to disable Smart Tool, After a few patches they pretty much CAN disable it, stop the insert and overwrite tools both being selected at the same time etc BUT details of how are not easily available as to what needs to be done.

My second post suggested that if in the future they decide to modify the user interface with something "LIKE" the Smart Tool aimed at a small part of the userbase they should introduce it in a way that the small part of the userbase (or new user) can turn the new tool on rather that a larger part of the userbase having to stop working and experiment to find ways of turning it off. I would have thought that this is basic logic but like you I wont be holding my breath to see if the current design team are logical.

camoscato:

because from their point of view it works.

I have yet to see one Avid person say that the ST is, or even could be, as fast or more efficient than the previous workflows.  So are you saying defauling to a slower, less efficient default interface is their idea of woking? I sure hope not.

AndrewAction:

I have yet to see one Avid person say that the ST is, or even could be, as fast or more efficient than the previous workflows. 

From a post by Frank Capria in the Control Key Changes thread relative to the initial reaction to the smart tool:

"A funny anecdote - an editor we approached to Alpha test is a broadcast documentary editor working under intense deadline pressure to put out a prime time hour every six weeks or so. We made him promise not to use Alpha builds in production. He promised. A week later he wrote that he liked the Smart Tool so much he installed it on his work machine. I lived in absolute fear that our Alpha build would crash at a bad time. (We got lucky. We all still have our jobs.)"

And then, this:

"Finally it released. And I know many of you will find this hard to believe, but MC 5 has been really well received by a lot of editors. Even the Smart Tool is loved by many. Yeah, we've caught bugs -- Randy mentioned some of the ones this group identified. Thanks. And yes, some people just don't like it. We have found that it tends to grow on folks. Even some people here were hating it at first then came around."

 And finally, there was this:

"Based on some of the commentary here, anything short of adopting 100% of your suggestions will be unacceptable. Please accept my apologies in advance. It's unlikely you will get 100% of your requests. That will lead some of you to continue to call us names, and call on Avid to fire us. A few of you will choose to be more polite and say that our hearts are in the right place (while implying we're completely incompetent nonetheless). This is where my experience as a network editor has served me best -- I have one hell of a thick skin.* Some of the cruelest producers on the planet have had at me." 

*Bolded by me

Liking something does not make it faster or more efficient does it?

Apart from the smart tool and control key changes there are the unusable solo/mute burttons.

If you have 16 audio tracks plus several video layers in your timeline using them is difficult.

Loss of RGB output on the (yes EOL) Adrenaline HD card.

After Bill Warner demoed me MC I paid over $100,000 of my money (Add 20 years inflation to get the true cost) for my first Avid system and it was money well spent.

Yeah, and it had 1.5 GB yes GB of storage.

The money spent on the MC5 upgrade was not.

I am with Luca on this one, MC5 is a mess and I want my money back.

 

 

Larry Rubin:

From a post by Frank Capria in the Control Key Changes thread relative to the initial reaction to the smart tool...

Larry, that is what I was referring to when I wrote about the CTRL key whitewash.

AndrewAction:

Liking something does not make it faster or more efficient does it?

Nope. Not from where I sit, anyhow. My apologies to the big fans of the Smart Tool.

Hi Larry:

             Maybe Avid can reprogram the UI so that with one push of a button, the whole interface switches back to how it worked on MC 4.0.5.13, while in the other position you have the new ST system UI ? 

 

Mark

The idea of a "classic" mode and an "enhanced" mode has been made earlier in other threads. There has been significant debate on that subject since, both pro and con.

Regardless of Avid's perception of the usefulness or otherwise of the UI redesign, as I've said earlier the fact that nearly a year later a good percentage of their existing customer base is still unhappy with ST should make Avid stop and think.  There is no real sign of this as far as I can see.

I see the issue in rather starker terms than a simple failure by Avid to accept that ST might be based on a flawed paradigm.  I see it as Avid needing to decide whether it wants to migrate MC to the prosumer market or leave it as a rock-solid professional tool.  If it's the former, then at least let us know.

Meantime, I'm continuing in the Lightworks alpha test program.

This is interesting:

http://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw5.html

Yes, it is meant primarily as an encoder, I'm wondering how it handles AVCHD...

Mark Job:

luca.mg:

they should fire whoever is responsible for designing this big mess and step back to the MC 4 code, the manager(s) who hired the above software designers and gave the green light to this (counter) revolution should get the pink slip as well,

Hi Carl & Luca:

                                                       In my opinion Avid as a company seems to be hemorrahging cash ! Have any of you read their business reports over the last two years ? I found it very interesting reading indeed ! Although it is true they are improving somewhat recently, the overall trend is still slightly down as far as I can tell from the little I can find online. I can't find where there is a real CEO ? There is a C.O.O - I will have to re-read a little. You know what I mean ? A *traditional President who's main responsibility is to showcase the company's vision and course over the next few years. The other NLE companies are quite open about where they want to go in the next year, but Avid company seems a little vague on where it's going. I think Avid's navigational compass could be spinning a bit. I've been trying to find some information which discusses the specific direction Avid wants to go, other than "hold on and enjoy the ride" kind of statements written on this forum. I am NOT trying to speculate on Avid products thank you I understand Avid employees can't come online and discuss in detail what's next over the proceeding few months to year (s), but I would have thought they would have made some kind of an official statement by now. I do hope they have an idea where they will be going *based on user feedback from independent Beta testers outside of the company ? I find the company communication with the customer to be very poor ! I find it so weird and creepy the way changes are made. For example; was there a memo or some kind of ReadMe publication made available, which gave a "heads up" forward view that major changes were being made to the upcoming MC5 UI and functionality before MC version 5.x was released ? Perhaps such a form of communication could have saved some post editors their jobs ? Is it just me, or is there some special internal information loop high profile editors can get from the company, which we cannot ? Forgive me if I read as though I'm totally clued out here, but ever since I became an Avid customer, I have been in the dark and never really understood how this company operates. I've never been able to get any information out of Avid, and trying to communicate with the company is almost impossible. This has been my experience.

Mark

Mark,

I've read the past five years of Avid's Annual Reports, listened to the earnings conference calls and their most recent Investor Day presentation.

First off, Avid of course has a CEO, Gary Greenfield--his name is very much out there with all things Avid. As for the cash situation, yes they have burned through a lot of cash. That said, it seems entirely likely that the company will return to profitability at some point this year.

As for tipping their hand about what may be in store for the future, their interpretation of what a publicly traded company can disclose about future, revenue generating products seems way too strict. Intel publishes processor road maps, IBM trumpets technology breakthroughs and predicts when they might come to market, Sony gives presentations about upcoming cameras, chips designs and storage, we heard about the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf literally years before they came to market... but Avid is legally prevented from saying whether the SmartTool will be fully, incontrovertibly disable-able?