New position for SCS on this forum

videoITguy wrote on 9/16/2013, 2:26 PM
There is apparently a new position and a new method of doing things on this forum

Adam is QA at SCS
I am a new QA Tester for SCS. As part of my job I look through the forums to see if I can help people and or see if people have issues that I can add to our database for the engineers to look at.

Goto this following thread and scroll to the bottom of the thread:


set wrote on 9/16/2013, 8:32 PM
Hello Adam! Glad to join here and nice to meet you!

Kimberly wrote on 9/16/2013, 9:32 PM
Welcome Adam! It's great to have you with us.
ushere wrote on 9/16/2013, 9:33 PM
what may be very helpful is an actual list of known problems in your data base to start with...

Grazie wrote on 9/17/2013, 1:07 AM
Leslie:"....what may be very helpful is an actual list of known problems in your data base to start with..."

It's been asked before and I can't recall it was responded to back then either. But ask away, I'll add my wish to this too.

Here are 2 similar wishes:-
1] videoITguy: "I am aware that SCS maintains a known issue database- and AFAIK, this is is not available in any public way."[/link]

2] "I only wish Test team, which I really suspect monitors this forum but doesn't post, would weigh in once and awhile. I would like access to the bug database - wishful thinking."[/link]

I have to think that our new SCS Staffer has been primed - wouldn't you?

ritsmer wrote on 9/17/2013, 1:09 AM
Also a warm welcome to you from Copenhagen, Denmark.

Having taken part in this forum for many years it is very good to notice the upcoming positive openness from SCS.

I hope it is a definitive farewell to the often quite annoying deep silence that was before.
Grazie wrote on 9/17/2013, 1:17 AM
I can't tell you Adam, how much I agree with ritsmer.


ushere wrote on 9/17/2013, 2:08 AM
i know, i know, but all we can do is but ask.....

in a way i find it very annoying that we (customers) can spend inordinate amounts of time and energy banging our heads against brick walls when all scs has to do is simply tell us that there IS a brick wall ;-(

i'm not saying anyone else is any better at keeping their customers in the picture, but wouldn't it be nice to take the lead in something so simple....
Grazie wrote on 9/17/2013, 2:42 AM
Leslie : when all scs has to do is simply tell us that there IS a brick wall

Ah, but that would be a Hardware issue! Kinda not the scope for SCS - wouldn't you think? Unless, unless, unless it was a warranted "Supported" Brick Wall. But there again, they'd most likely need to have the "Mortar", between the bricks certified as "Supported" too.

Dang, just can't win eh?


Grazie wrote on 9/17/2013, 2:45 AM
Ah, but we do have a sparkling, brand new Staffer! - Slick!

Adam, you're gonna have a lot of . . . erm . . amusing anecdotes to retell around that SCS water cooler: "Hah, you just ain't gonna believe . . . . "


ritsmer wrote on 9/17/2013, 5:14 AM
ushere I kinda agree with you - but - who do not remember a few years back where some Super Whiners scrutinized this forum for possible issues - and when they found one, it all started:
Whine, whine, mega project, deadline tomorrow, losing multi $$$ customer - blah blah ...

it always ended with some praise of other NLEs.

I often wondered if these people ever had edited bigger things than their Grandma's last birthday - and just tried to do some tasteless marketing for other products - and so - an official list of known issues might bring such unwanted behavior back.
ushere wrote on 9/17/2013, 7:11 AM
well sometime ago, after a frightful series of experiences with 10 i did load up cs6, and the demo of edius. i didn't need to look at avid (having used it extensively many years ago), nor fcp since i had no intention of wasting money on a yet another mac, and spent a good few weeks working with them....

but here i am, still working and making a living with vegas, and pleased that scs really jumped with the still sequence foul up - a move which reassured me that scs can do what needs to be done in a hurry....

i am sure there's always going to be people venting about vegas when it doesn't work for them, whether over grandma's birthday or a 30' tvc, it's simply natural that people need to express their 'frustration' to people who (they hope) will understand the cause of their anger - after all, we're all in the same boat here.

talk of jumping / switching nle's is cathartic, not that the threat carries any weight hereabouts, other than annoying many of us....

anyway, (yes, it's a quiet, very wet night), i still think we should be informed of known problems (as nvidia does in their release notes), and that scs as a priority should give some direction regarding gpu functionality - and i do realise that in many cases this might well be hardware / driver related - but if scs are running without problems then the least they can do is list hardware / driver combinations that are know to work.

Dan Sherman wrote on 9/17/2013, 8:08 AM
Welcome Adam,

Were you in one of those introductory videos a while back?
They were great!
We should all to the same.
But then you may rethink overseeing such a rag tag bunch. LOL!
And the odd technical moron, ala me.
Mostly we're harmless though, except maybe for Grazie, and only want help from each other from time to time.
Thanks for looking in,...

Kimberly wrote on 9/17/2013, 9:39 AM
Maybe the database could be made available with certain restrictions:

1. Non-disclosure agreement similar to the one we signed for the VP12 beta testing.
2. Registered Vegas user for X number of years? (To demonstrate familiarity with the product.)
3. Vegas forum contributor for X number of years? (To winnow out those users whose first post is "Wahhhh Vegas sucks! It's costing me money . . .")
4. Other well crafted restrictions to control access to sensitive information?

With proper access to such a database, we users could (and most likely would) test among our various set-ups to see who has what problem on which hardware. Seems like that information would be most valuable to SCS in identifying solutions.

Adam, is this a viable idea?


Grazie wrote on 9/17/2013, 9:55 AM
Kimberley, a solid suggestion, based in the here and now.


Geoff_Wood wrote on 9/17/2013, 5:30 PM
"1. Non-disclosure agreement similar to the one we signed for the VP12 beta testing.

Um, did you just break a non-disclosure agreement ?!

NormanPCN wrote on 9/17/2013, 6:28 PM
but if scs are running without problems then the least they can do is list hardware / driver combinations that are know to work.

If it were only that simple. In threaded applications and functions where the problem exhibits as a hang/unresponsive situation then everything in the computer matters (CPU, source material, etc) as the problem is showing itself as a race condition on some synchronization object(s).

Even if a new driver does not introduce a bug it can cause something that worked previously to not work, and therefore people on the net state the driver is buggy, if that code has a race condition problem. For example, the driver performance on a function may have changed and this changes the precise timing conditions which might expose a race condition, all else being equal.