Jim:
Yeah, I get the possibility that a percentage of the complaints may be attributed to OE. It’s particularly funny because I’m guilty of doing exactly that myself. I posted what I thought was a bug with the new contextual menu/toolbar feature improvement introduced …and as it turned out, it was an out of date system mouse driver causing it. However, once fixed and working, it brought up a second related issue that turned out be an actual bug that was passed onto Steinberg’s bug base. Nothing showstopping and completely easy to work around. But there it was. In my defense, the original issue was not an issue with C9.5. Apparently, enough changed in the code revision to trip up the driver. Lesson learned.
I have read through the Issues forum and have duplicated quite a number of the reported problems (editing Waves 9 plugins causing crashes was particularly concerning to me).
It’s reasonable to accept that not everyone uses all the features in the program (seriously, who does?) and so I find it understandable when I read posts from users who say the program works perfectly. But I come from a musical equipment and software manufacturing background and have spent hundreds of hours testing things. I honestly believe the majority of the complaints are legitimate and I stand by “sloppy” regarding this build. That’s my opinion. But I get your point and opinion. Doesn’t bother me that they differ.
The main thing that was bugging me got tucked away somewhere in the middle of the piece, centering around Steinberg’s adherence to an artificial release schedule policy. My thinking is that, long term, it’s better to annoy your user base by holding back a release to spend more time tightening up the program, in the hopes that the effort results in a build with less problems and subsequently…happier customers and less griping. Better PR all around.
Nice talking with you.