Originally Posted By: Dave
+1

Unfortunately, only a few people would buy a new version BIAB without the '50 new features'. It'e not a big selling point to say 'we've just fixed 150 menu problems'

I really would like them to take the time to do all of that clean up, but the cost would be enormous with very little positive new income. Plus, as many have said, this is an old product with hundreds, if not thousands of additions over the years. As an ex-programmer, I know that unless you really know what you are trying to fix, and all of the interactions, any change can be disastrous. And without hours of testing and quality control, you might be worse off than before.

It seems they can fix the new stuff pretty easily (eg real tracks) but not the legacy product. Just look at all the requests for Notation / Music XML that have gone unanswered, but they were able to add synsys which is XML related.

PGMusic has to put its money into getting us to buy a new version every year. I am not sure how many would buy a version that is just fixing errors.


Yes Dave this perspective can be had. I am an ex programmer too, and I have led a team of designers designing complex software (to teach maths to kids).

My view is that there so much clutter and compromise code and gui that its got too old. If BIAB is to make it to the 21st century then its going to be 64 bit - which compels a rewrite. Instead of viewing this as a problem, its a fantastic opportunity to simplify build in a more modular way, add new concepts and features and repain all these quirks.

I have worked software through several redesigns.

Cubase has, on more than one occasion, gone back to the drawing board and developed entirely new software (Cubase VST, Cubase SX), there is a general appearance of professionalism, rock solid stability and above all user utility.
The code interfaces have been redesigned many times. Presently they are working on a new powerful score package (you can already write a full orchestral score), they keep coming up with genuine innovations - like expression maps, which allow customisation of individual MIDI articulation/notes. The products are largely price comparible.

Yes the user base is larger,(and likely a bigger development team) but that is BECAUSE it is such a good product. BIAB is not taken seriously by many professional musicians, especially the young and there is still no VST, no 64 bit, no stability, no further innovation (since real tracks) and a flakey architecture. IMO.
To continue with this development philosophy is (IMO) a downward spiral, commercially.


Last edited by ZeroZero; 01/10/15 02:29 AM.
Win 11 64, Asus Rog Strix z390 mobo, 64 gig RAM, 8700k