jveekeres:

"will there ever be a 99,99% bug-free fully functional version of MC5 before MC 5.5 is released???".

From your response I conclude we are again asked to trust Avid's " bigger picture" on MC.

...and this is another concern of mine: will I have to pay an upgrade fee to get all of the MC 5 malfunctions fixed? This "wait and trust us" Avid mantra smells of "wait for the next paid release and trust us": it would be very dishonest of Avid to release a new version of the software while we haven't had a fully functional MC 5 for all of its lifetime.

jveekeres:

"will there ever be a 99,99% bug-free fully functional version of MC5 before MC 5.5 is released???"

I don't think any version has ever gotten to 99.99%, and that was when there were less features, and when the purchase price was more than 10 times as much as it is today. However, patches have never been as quick as the past two years, I think.

Hi Andrew,

AndrewAction:

My English may not be the best but I still understand my quote above to read ... IF I had been in a position to do so  in the quoted cicumstances "I" would have issued a DCM to the offending team member for his remarks.

Strangley I do not interprate it as calling for someone to be sacked. If some others are provoked into thinking that .....well our whole craft is about being provocative and suggestive so our audience take what THEY want out of what we deliver.

You and I have been around and around on this before, so I have no idea why you keep bringing it up and trying to jump through linguistic hoops in an effort to claim that a) you weren't calling for anyone to be fired, and b) if you had you were right to do so because being provocative is the only way to get attention and c) anyway it's not your fault what someone else reads into your words.

Semantics notwithstanding, to a reasonable person, your suggestion that you would've fired the guy in question implies that the guy should be fired, otherwise why would you even bring it up?

At any rate, I don't see the point of all the hysterics, whether it's from you or me or anybody else.  Larry has repeatedly stated on this thread that he'd like to get more people to participate in the discussion, and I don't think all the internet ranting and shouting about people getting fired helps.   

ciao,
Carl 

Hi,

Thought I would add my experiences here.

Recently had a call from AVID UK. The AVID employee noted that I had downloaded the trial for MC5, and asked if I would give them feedback. I did. Part of the discussion we had does relate to my decision to go with AVCHD cameras and my needs so may not apply to all AVID users, but this summarises my points:

MC4 = excellent NLE

For AVCHD transcoding, whether using MC (or FCP for that matter although at least that allows background importing of avchd), slows me down and costs me money. Therefore I have explored the following NLEs: Edius (great realtime performance but missing lots of key things for me and I would be tied to monitoring via GV hardware - apparently Sky used Edius for coverage for Ryder Cup so may hold sway in that environment; Sony Vegas (good RT performance and excellent with audio, but odd interface has me fighting with it). Then I arrive at Production Premium CS5 - I discovered I could import my avchd clips and edit up to four streams of avhcd off a single sata drive! Using a raid I can mix my avchd footage with other codec source files and still edit smoothly either previewing at full until it chokes and then turning to 1/2 or 1/4 for more complex stuff or rendering previews which is quick on my new machine. Further more I can drop in AE comps without rendering. Finally I can batch export via AME to BD, DVD, web, etc. There are other benefits. BUT I STILL PREFER EDITING IN MC4 to Premiere Pro. Problem it is costs me in time and therefore money. GUESS what ADOBE have gained at both AVID and APPLE's expense because of a number of things: two of which would be - 1)no serious bluray authoring package on Mac (something that has been requested on these forums in the past) - that was why I upgraded a very old version of premiere to CS4 - this is an area where AVID could have made inroads but instead that opportunity was seized by Adobe; 2) Apple and, to a lesser extent, Avid's insistence on transcoding (I know the arguments in favour, but CS5 is challenging those) rather than native editing - check out Creative Cow, DVInfo etc for posts by newbies to CS5 who have switched from FCP/Avid to CS5 especially those using avchd cameras and DSLR recording in h.264 inside the .mov container. As more switch so they pass on the word! AVID and FCP are both under attack from Adobe.

This is not the days of tape where you had to wait for footage to be copied - in those days AVID was KING. With the advent of tapeless media, people want (need?) immediate access to the footage. Nothing frustrates people more than having to wait, knowing it is costing them money. 

AMA is good, BUT it does not work with AVCHD, performance with native codecs is sometimes not as good as with some other NLEs and for all codecs you can not simply export a QT ref - all of which slow you down. All of this without introducing interface changes that force a slowdown.  What worries me about the current AVID issues are they are reminiscent of the death of Liquid. The anger of forum members at the lack of information. AVID is now under pressure from Adobe as well as FCP. Time is running out!

All NLEs have issues and bugs. We know that. Check out all the NLE forums. Sometimes that is because of hardware, sometimes user error, sometimes poor programming. BUT it is how the company reacts to the issues that makes people happy loyal customers or not. MC5 should have built on MC4 - in some respects it has, but the issues are annoying editors and furthermore the seeming insistence that AVID is right and the editors are wrong regarding smart tool etc. suggests that either AVID is NOT LISTENING or it does not know what to do. It knows it has to improve to remain profitable. But does it know what it has to do to enable those things to happen?

MC5.5 must be awesome! It needs to address all of the issues raised by AVID's users and editors. It needs to be free for MC5 users and at a very attractive price point for MC4 users. It needs to be the NLE that everyone is talking about. The next generation of FCP has been delayed (some have suggested that success of CS5 has been the reason for the delay, others have said interface arguments, who knows?). If that is "awesome" as Jobs is credited as saying then where would that leave AVID? Time is not on AVID's side. They stepped up to the plate with MC4 but stepped back with MC5. They now need to step up again and this time hit a home run!

I want the workflow enhancements and RT performance with avchd that other NLEs have but with the STRENGTHS of MC in a nice package called MC5.

Larry Rubin:

But I would be more than happy to take a release for a test drive after it goes through beta and before it goes to market.

I long thought that Moderators of official Avid Forums should be required to be Beta Testers for new products that fall under their forum of expertise.  That way they have an early knowledge of whats coming out, what went into the development process, and can answer user questions with a better grasp on the process.  No disrespect intended, but taking a test drive after beta and before release is too little, too late.

Hi Job,

If the number should be 98%, 99% or 99,99% is indeed a matter of interpretation of "broadcast". What matters to me is if Avid wants me to trust them then I expect them to make some public commitments to the quality of their products. But this they refuse to do. Of course there are limitation to the information Avid can supply but that does not apply in the same way to these commitments.

I also understand that there are economic limitations to how long Avid with keep releasing updates for a certain version. But the current way of releasing patches feels like they are trying to fix everything fast with Gaffer and Avid does not hide this in the disclaimer concerning patches.

http://www.avid.com/US/support/downloads/patches/disclaimer

 In the end I believe nobody has paid Avid for a product to remain in this state!  

Just upgraded from MC 3.5 and I'd read about it before, but now seeing it first hand, I don't get why there would be a need to suddenly limit the user interface options.  If anything, there should be more options.  I've always asked for the aility to resize any window, such as the mix tool, or the audio meters (more than just making it a little longer).  Kind of like the way the timecode box can be resized.  I don't write code, but what's the big deal?

switthaus:

I long thought that Moderators of official Avid Forums should be required to be Beta Testers for new products that fall under their forum of expertise...taking a test drive after beta and before release is too little, too late.

I need to remind you that our participation here on these Forums, and mine both as a moderator and a contributing user is voluntary. That means that we as moderators also receive no compensation for our time and efforts. In addition to 8 to 10 hours everyday at the Pentagon Channel, I have (paid) teaching commitments and (paid) freelance obligations almost everyday after my full time job. Beta testing Avid products would require yet another 8 hour or so cycle everyday to do the job right, and it's uncompensated time as well. Not to mention time with family and loved ones and some few minutes to sleep. If I could fit a Beta test commitment into all of that and maintain my health, I would do so. Add to that the fact that it is highly possible that a Beta tester for Avid would have to buy a new computer just to do the Beta testing if the system requirements change as they recently have. With all due respect Scott, that's just not within the realm of possibility for me right now, at this time, and with my financial situation being what it is as well.

In addition to test drives, I would also be glad to consult and offer feedback on design elements as they are developed for Media Composer from the perspective of a working editor's high pressure environment, to help refine the product approach before the initial alpha build. But it simply is not possible for me to take on a Beta commitment as well.

 

Larry Rubin:

I would also be glad to consult and offer feedback on design elements as they are developed for Media Composer from the perspective of a working editor's high pressure environment, to help refine the product approach before the initial alpha build.

I suspect time and financial sacrifice is something that keeps many people from being Beta testers.  However, input from users with the experience of someone like Larry during the development stages would, in my opinion, be invaluable. It's too bad that Larry and other mods can't be consulted during the planning stages of a feature revision. I think many of the horrible mistakes that were made with MC5 could and would have been avoided.

Larry Rubin:

In addition to test drives, I would also be glad to consult and offer feedback on design elements as they are developed for Media Composer from the perspective of a working editor's high pressure environment, to help refine the product approach before the initial alpha build. But it simply is not possible for me to take on a Beta commitment as well.

…Hi Larry: I don't really understand why Scott Switthaus called your moderatorship into question ? I figured you being a senior editor at the Pentagon Channel does sound like a high end daily production environment, and it is true from my own personal experience that beta testing takes a lot of time daily to do it right.

*I, for one, would love to beta test MC, but now my HP nw9440 is on the "No longer Qualified Systems List." I would need Avid to send me a Dell M6500, or an HP qualified workstation laptop PC to be able to test away. I have the time to Beta test. I've signed NDA's and done many a beta testing protocol before. I would do my best to break whatever beta they sent me, and if I can't break it, then it must be good ! I would tell you the truth if something doesn't work, and then you won't like me anymore (or you're already there), but you would have as accurate as possible a thorough report including malfunction strings.

Larry Rubin:

And I will indeed have a look at the Adobe CS5/Hearst story. I would be particularly interested to see how they're moving product around in file based exchange to go live to air with, and what type of apps and database the newsroom writers are using to write and communicate with editors, and what type of shared server/storage networked environment they're working in. If you have any specific links you recommend, please post them

 

http://dv.com/article/101146

switthaus:

I long thought that Moderators of official Avid Forums should be required to be Beta Testers for new products that fall under their forum of expertise.

Would you prefer moderators to be under an NDA?

Job ter Burg:

switthaus:

I long thought that Moderators of official Avid Forums should be required to be Beta Testers for new products that fall under their forum of expertise.

Would you prefer moderators to be under an NDA?

…Hi Job: Technically, for Larry to be able to participate as a moderator AND an official AVID beta tester, then he would require a legal waver from Avid to talk about whatever specifics the company would deem OK. Usually, a beta tester is in full NDA and cannot legally discuss details of the Beta testing program. I gather Larry simply doesn't have the time to participate in any Beta Testing program, and sleep, or have a life. I do think Larry would be a good beta tester though. - And he's much more PC then me ;-) Ha ! Ha ! He ! He ! Larry :-)

 

Job ter Burg:

Would you prefer moderators to be under an NDA?

While in beta, yes, like everyone else.  After release, Mods could talk with more authority on why decisions were made, etc.

Brickwad:

t's too bad that Larry and other mods can't be consulted during the planning stages of a feature revision.

There is one:  it's called the beta program.  Even if experienced Mods like Larry could give 2 hours every other day or so to check on their workflow would be invaluable.  In beta, you know what new features are going in, whats changed, etc.  So one could focus on the ones that directly effect their workflow.