"You can't write software with main goal of being compatible with every possible OS and hardware configuration"

Well...... Vegas is only 1 operating system dependant - Windows. yes there are versions of windows but its the same core functions at work (Vista and Win7 only are allowed now).

Next hardware configuration, thats what Drivers are for!. Vegas is not dependand on certain hardware because it relies on the drivers (in the middle) to control it. These are standard units and can be tested to destruction if needed.

Lastly, Vegas uses environments like .NET. This is a standardised framework designed so software engineers can write code across the versions of windows and of any driver limitations.

Conclusion? Write your code correctly in the first place, use current frameworks, use up to date drivers and there you have it. After that, test it 'properly' and you have a working product that can be maintained easily and quickly. There will always be bugs, fact, but the trick is, how fast can they be rectified. In Beta stage, not for sale.

So whats wrong? well, like i said in another post, we are probably talking about legacy coding going back 12 years. This is difficuilt to manage and update. My heart goes out to the engineers - that must be an awesome task to overcome.

My personal thoughts only.

Paul.

jabloom, Ray,

I agree with your points, but Bob has some validity too. What we choose to run the software on is not within Sony's control, but it IS in their control to tell us exactly what they're testing it on and achieving stability. Down to the last detail. I've been harping on this for a while.

If they tell me it's a specific hardware config and a clean boot partition with no other codecs, software, etc. and it actually works exactly the way they say it should, then everything becomes my responsibility if I choose NOT to do that.

I completely agree with that point. That is SCS's responsibility. But I wonder how the Vegas Pro community would feel if for Vegas Pro 12, it was only 64 bit, supported only Windows 8, had no way of accessing 32 bit codecs/plugins and only used GPU processing on nVidia graphics cards of the Quadro or 500/600 series?

I'd bet that Vegas Pro would be plenty stable with those kind of limitations.

if sony guaranteed a stable, bullet proof system based on a zx80, or something at the other end of the spectrum then i'd buy it.

as a pro the price is unimportant if the product does the job.

I am not in a position to boycott Sony for issues with 10 or 11. I don't use Vegas much and am still on v7. But

quote from VanLazarus
---------
I want to be part of the solution too, but honestly, I don't have time to recreate and catalogue the many crashes that I've gotten with Vegas over the last year. Maybe if I felt like I was in direct communication with one of the engineers, I'd be more motivated.
--------

Herein lies part of the problem. If you don't document the problems they can't fix them. I'm not harping or intend to slam but they can't fix bugs if they don't know about them or have enough details. Simply stating it crashes when I pull a clip into the timeline with no more info leaves the developers no where to go to fix the issue except to a crystal ball.

While I think most people here are technically minded, computer savvy etc... I would just like to remind ALL that if you find a bug then report it. No matter how minor. It may take some time to properly document the issue but that is the only way to expect a fix to be made.

By the same token, if SCS support gets overrun with bug fixes then it will bring their attention to the problems (rather than an occasional "nut job" that has a weird one off problem) and may allow them to direct/hire more resources to getting the (new) majority of bugs fixed.

I must say though that having endured the Pinnacle studio stuff, this all seems sadly familiar.

Are any of the Sonic Foundry programmers still working on Vegas? If not then perhaps Sony should look them up. Seriously, that was one stable problem. Sony had slowly but sure added great feature and great bugs.

"Are any of the Sonic Foundry programmers still working on Vegas? If not then perhaps Sony should look them up."

Oh come on... get real. I don't get where people come up with this comparison stuff to Vegas back in the version 4..5... 6 days.
Vegas today is NOTHING like it was years ago. It has gotten soooo much more complicated. It's nothing less than comparing apples to oranges.

In fact if Vegas today was at all comparable to the versions mentioned above it would be dead because no one would buy something so old and outdated.

This whole thread is just plain silly.

"I must say though that having endured the Pinnacle studio stuff, this all seems sadly familiar."

...Then Avid bought Pinnacle and things *really* got bad for the Pinnacle users.

In addition to what you said, if the Vegas programmers can't duplicate your issue, then how in the world are they expected to fix it? Vegas tech support is there to help you use Vegas - not to fix your PC.

"I can deal with all other shortcomings if SCS fixes two major flaws: The replace footage flaw & the render to black flaw"

For sure - the last thing you want is a few clips from that porno cropping up in the middle of the kiddies 'fun activities' DVD !

;-)

geoff

Yeah. SCS should write their software to cope with duff RAM, or refuse to take advantage of the new extended RAM capabilities 'just in case'. Not to mention make it bullet-proof against misconfigured or bugged Win installations, dodgey device drivers and plugins !.

Not suggesting that there are no valid and important Vegas bugs.

Maybe some level of system-checker could be built into install procedures, to guarantee library and other dll version levels at least. Would eliminate many vaguaries at the outset, instead of chasing failure logs ....

geoff

A Spectrum was a Z80 !

I had several, one expanded to 32KB.

;-)

geoff

Hulk? Your specs say you're running XP. Are you "presently" running to an updated VP11 install?

Grazie

MUTTLEY said:
"Bob, I'm a little surprised by your hardline reply, jab's suggestion that people who are having problems explore the possibility of what might be wrong with their system outside of Vegas isn't just reasonable but exactly what people should do"

If that's what jab had meant then I'd entirely agree with you. Of course no software vendor can be held accountable for faulty hardware and yes, this is the first thing users should check, even on systems that have been running reliably for some time. New software can cause previously unused faulty memory to be used, it can cause the CPU to draw more power or for longer periods of time and overstretch power supplies or cooling systems.

jabloomf1230 said:
"But I wonder how the Vegas Pro community would feel if for Vegas Pro 12, it was only 64 bit, supported only Windows 8, had no way of accessing 32 bit codecs/plugins and only used GPU processing on nVidia graphics cards of the Quadro or 500/600 series?

I'm pretty certain there's be a lot of unhappy chappies who'd have a lot of vitriolic things to say. As you say though, yes it probably would be very stable.

There's the problem though.
One of the biggest selling points of the product is exactly the things that you're saying the user shouldn't be doing because that'll make it crash and it's the users fault when it does. I think we're trying to have our cake and eat it too here.

In part I do agree with you. I make a conscious effort to reduce the strain that Vegas has to endure by getting all my ducks in line. I convert all audio to 48KHz and any codecs I know will be problematic to an easier to edit codec. Anything that is not at my project's frame rate I convert, any complex composits either get done in a separate Vegas porject or in AE and I haven't had V9 carsh on me in ages. Some of the things I've seen Vegas users do over the years leave me in awe that they could ever get their projects to render.

Things is though this is knowledge I've learned the hard way and I'm pretty good at studying a system and coming to grips with why it isn't happy. I'm not a typical Vegas users who just wants to get creative.

By comparison and from my brief brush with it Ppro handles user expectations better. You can mix frame rates on the one T/L but you get warned things will not go as well as they could. Adobe does have a list of approved video cards but you can wrangle a lot of others into working...at your own peril. Avid used to put you into a complete straight jacket regarding hardware.

If SCS took some of this to heart and put some fences around user expectations I'm certain they'd be getting less flack, they could do some of this in their code and some of it in their documentation. Instead at best we're left to rely on Chinese whispers and that to me does not seem very professional.


Bob.

Rhino you wrote: "I'm a big fan of Vegas and SCS, but I can get 10e to crash VEG files that are rock steady in 9e. This crash is repeated on all (5) workstations which are rock-steady."

Is it possible to tell us about this in some detail? What did you do to get 10e to crash on (5) workstations that 9e would not? I paid for V10 but got ripped off as I have never been able to use it for the same reason.


"I can deal with all other shortcomings if SCS fixes two major flaws: The replace footage flaw & the render to black flaw"

Rhino want to add your name to the list of those calling on SCS to fix the replaced footage bug in V10? If so, let me know and I will add your name.

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=793540&Replies=123

Erik

Probably getting something addressed in a previous version is probably a lower priority than issues in the current, but as it was (hopefully) fixed in V11b510, then presumably the bug is in a similar (or same) module, and could be routine to fix ...

Hoping for you.

geoff

"Hoping for you."

Geoff, would you be willing to add your name to the list of those asking for an update to V10?

Erik

i am have bought Vegas ms10 and 11 and and was holding off on buying pro until i could aford it. thinking it was going to be so much better. when i finally bought it and got to really play with it i was less than impressed and frustrated at the crashes. if something doesn't change with scs i will probably keep my money in my pocket or start considering a new program. scs i want you to grow to be better

wetrock? SCS provide for a DEMO to download. It's the concept of try before you buy?

Cheers

Grazie

SCS provide for a DEMO to download. It's the concept of try before you buy?

If someone happily running Vegas 10 or prior on their XP Pro computer wanted to "try before they bought" they could not. They had to either upgrade to Windows 7 or go out and buy a whole new computer.

I have a lot of sympathy for those who are truly upset about Vegas 11 because in fact many did go out and buy a brand new computer just to try to get Vegas 11 to work and it still doesn't work well. They have every right to be upset. Really upset.

John

@farss,

I think that you and I are in a lot more agreement than the people reading our posts realize. As to Premiere Pro, I have used it all the way back to the educational version 1.0 (!!). The 32 bit PC flavors of PPro were far more bug-ridden than Vegas Pro ever was. But the comparison to those 32 bit PPro versions and either the Mac or the recent 64 bit versions is like night and day.

There's a user that patrols the Adobe forums, Harm Millard, who is in my mind, the "Good Samaritan of PC Hardware". He spends a lot of time helping other PPro users with hardware and performance issues. Adobe has a separate sub forum now for hardware-related questions and this is why I suggested several months ago that SCS restructure their forum lists and add a Vegas Pro hardware sub forum. A number of people here didn't like that idea, because they were worried that those hardware-related posts would "get lost" somewhere and the bulk of Vegas Pro users wouldn't visit that sub forum.

There is one other design issue with Vegas that could be addressed by SCS. And that would be to separate compositing into its own app, ala After Effects. With such a split, you lose the convenience of an "all in one" solution, but you would probably gain some additional stability.

Adobe has a separate sub forum now for hardware-related questions and this is why I suggested several months ago that SCS restructure their forum lists and add a Vegas Pro hardware sub forum. A number of people here didn't like that idea, because they were worried that those hardware-related posts would "get lost" somewhere and the bulk of Vegas Pro users wouldn't visit that sub forum.
===============
I tend to agree with them.

Just take a look at the DVDA forum. Hardly any usage. You get better responses by posting DVDA questions here on the Vegas forum.

A Vegas-Pro hardware forum would be infrequently visited since most of the people who could help are right here on this forum and check back very frequently even when they have very little time.

John

wetrock? SCS provide for a DEMO to download. It's the concept of try before you buy?That is a snippy, unhelpful comment and, more importantly, it completely misses the main reason why so many (including me) are completely ticked off at SCS, to whit:

The program breaks down when you do big, real world projects.

When you evaluate a "demo" program, which is usually crippled or time-constrained, you don't usually put two hours and ten track of video on the timeline, with multiple fX. Also, you may not hit on the combination of things that causes it to break.

As I am posting this I am once again struggling with the Olympic Marathon Trials footage I shot almost two weeks ago, and which I should have been finished with ages ago. Several people want the footage in different formats, and I am finding that I get crashes with some formats and not others. There is no way you are going to discover this with a demo. I find that I get crashes with some plugins (Mercalli) but not others. You won't find that in a demo. I am finding that the 64-bit version under Windows 7 is unstable in different ways than the 32-bit version under Windows XP. You won't find that in any demo.

I am now rendering out to multiple Cineform intermediates (the 64-bit version crashed overnight on a plain-jane cuts-only version of the project, just hanging at the 91% mark). I am hoping I can get the project to render in segments, glue those back together and then render out using Vegas 8.0c.

I am really, really disgusted with the unhelpful Vegas fanboy comments being made here. These problems are not just issues with newbies or people who lack the expertise to be using these products, or people who are doing things that the product was never intended to do. These are people who have problems with a product that has been borked by engineers who have totally lost their way.

Vegas 10 & Vegas 11 are not fit for their intended purpose and both Sony and their Madison susidiary are hurting their reputation by allowing this broken product to continue to be sold. It truly is that bad.