Sure 13 feels stable but that's after paying for the 10, 11, 12 and 13 upgrades!
None of the new customer prevention bugs have been fixed and the only thing new that I have found moderately useful is being able to add audio FXs to clips. There's some nice bling and there's some bad bling so even that's a zero sum game :(

Bob.

I never wanted GPU so they can remove that from 14 and I'd be happy. :)

But, no matter what, if I upgraded to 14 it would still be a deal as I never bought above 10. So, to me, a "bug fix" has NEVER had a price tag. :)

I'll second eliminating the GPU dependency. I would upgrade from 8 to 14 if they did that. As Bob said, Zero sum game. The complaints were there after the release of every version of Vegas, BUT they subsided after awhile. Not so with 13.

I have said all along that GPU dependency was Vegas downfall. Before that the program worked great without an endless and expensive quest for finding suitable computers and experimenting with video cards.

Like Steve said, "I never wanted GPU so they can remove that from 14 and I'd be happy."

John

I never wanted GPU...

Sorry Gentlemen but I don't think it is a matter of wanting it; we need it. Modern codecs and 4K are just power hungry and a CPU alone will not be able to handle all the work. Try it yourself, use my 4K 100Mbps 24p files and play it back CPU only with some FXs applied and you will see what I mean. It's not only SCS that has GPU acceleration, PPro or now called CC as well as Davinci all rely on it and for a good reason.

sick and wrong upgrade path isn't it?

If CARS were sold with major defects, the guberment would force recalls for rapairs, NOT at the owners expense. Not sure why failing software gets a pass... "oh! Buy a new version.... yet has the SAME BUGS!" Nice.

software is not a car. Very poor analogy for understanding what software is, why it exists, and how does it relate to the user.

Here is a better analogy. Software is just script, much like a fictional novel, or even a research study. It is never complete, never really defined as an end in and of itself, and never ever subject to not being able to be re-written one more time. Hence never without bugs.

"[I]Try it yourself, use my 4K 100Mbps 24p files and play it back CPU only...[/I]"

I tried it. It takes all the cores of an i7-3770(k) just to play the video on the timeline. No effects, color correction, etc.

Historical perspective: If intel could have pushed clock speeds up higher and higher without burning everyone's house down (remember Prescott?), we wouldn't be in this mess. Physics is a beach.

>>>>Sure 13 feels stable but that's after paying for the 10, 11, 12 and 13 upgrades!<<<

$150 to upgrade every 18 months = $8.3 per month.

How much does Adobe charge per month?

I'm not saying it's right, but there are plenty of other software developers who charge a lot more and fix nothing year after year. Just try Autodesk forums where people still complain about bugs from 1990s.

Just like some never wanted 3D, I don't use 4K and do not see myself using it in the near future. In fact, i don't see myself using it ever. I'm sure I will, but I'm sure I will use 3D at some point in the wishful future.

Using a 3rd party GPU accel setup is just disaster, the companies (AMD/Nvidia) don't cater to video editors, will happily break 100,000 video editors systems to get 2 billion other users working great on the new GTA. Hey ,I don't blame them: why make 100,000 people happy when the other 2 billion will pay your bills. If SCS wants GPU accel they should take advantage of who they are and create their own specific computers + hardware + software and make a Vegas GPU accelerated system for $10k, then everyone here can complain it's to expensive and they want to use the cheap consumer stuff. :)

But like I've always said when people have these major issues with Vegas (pre-GPU), stop buying what you're buying and buy what I use. It didn't have the issues (crashes & the like), yet everyone insisted on saying their setups were the way to go, even though there were constant issues.

sure, business is business is business, but sony vegas shoots itself in the foot by leaving it in constant beta state. peeps are tired of version after version NOT fixing some commonly known issues.
With the sony subsciption model being nearly equal to the industry standard one, why stay?

Would be a good PR move to ACTUALLY FIX the bugs in the current software version just once, BEFORE working on the next cash grab version.

You buy a car, you expect it to be driveable, not 10% failing right off the lot and needing repairs.
Last car I bought like that was an American made Corvette... sold it off in 6 months. Japan knows better than that.

Rinse and repeat - software is NOT a car! see above again.

do you spend money on it, buying a "product" you would expect to work?
What if I worked exclusively with GO PRO footage? Would Sony refund all my money for a failing product? ... a known bug for a globally popular camera, they seemed to completely ignore for 2 versions now.

How do you get a refund on failing software? You don't? Call Better Business Bureau? :D

Here is a better analogy. Software is just script, much like a fictional novel, or even a research study. It is never complete, never really defined as an end in and of itself, and never ever subject to not being able to be re-written one more time. Hence never without bugs.

Wow...I have to disagree with this completely.

[I]" software is NOT a car!"[/I]

It is, just like a script the design of a car or anything engineered by humans can always be made better.
There's plenty of scripts that crash and burn. Although no script is ever perfect it has to be believable and make sense. If your script has someone killed off in scene 19 and then appears in scene 27 without explanation your plot is in deep trouble and your audience is likely to burn the theatre down.

Cars, planes, screen plays and software all have to meet the same criterion, "fit for purpose".

Bob.

I agree with Bob that software has to be "fit for purpose" but it also "stretchable". But, it always was for me since I bought VP7 up to VP13.
The issue with a Bug is to identify it as such and leaving any doubt behind that the bug is not related to other software on the system or hardware.

Well if I remember correctly the reason we initially selected Vegas... back at version 4 I think... when the original developer owned it... was that no fancy video card was required.

Will_3

Are you still working with the same source files from the time you where using VP4? If so, I am sure you don't need a fancy card now either. I can look at and edit my D8 files without a fancy GPU, no problem at all.

I am by no means a neo-Luddite, but I think it’s good to keep in perspective where we are. 14 years ago I paid (I’m not even going to say it) for a system that could edit uncompressed SD in real time – up to a dissolve – had to render that. It had bugs too. Today we expect our editing systems to handle all flavors of HD for under 2 grand including the software. 4K? We want it and we want it now. All cameras. All codecs. All frame rates. At best/full. Using video cards that were released after the editing software was.

Don’t get me wrong – I love today. And I too despise the bugs that have remained after several versions of added (IMO) useless bling. But threads like this make me give thanks I’m not a software developer, but simply one who can b!tch about them – which I admittedly do plenty of.

And I too would like to see GPU acceleration gone – in favor of dedicated video processing boards. It’s what was used for years so that pre-Pentium era CPUs could even work with video or graphics. Think of what could be done today with a few powerful processors on a dedicated board that wasn’t even feeding our displays? You want multiple streams of 4K with effects in real time? Buy the board. Otherwise proxy and pre-render to your hearts content. I would think it could sustain us several years into the future – at least until 8 or 16 or 32K cameras are in iPhones.

This mess we see today began with the brilliant decision several years ago (embraced by SCS and eventually lot of others) that high-end video editing is for EVERYONE and should run on whatever computer EVERYONE has. That model started falling apart as soon as HD became popular – so let’s use their video cards as processors - sometimes. And that brings us to now.
*hack*cough* Grampa rant over.

atom12
[I] ...in favor of dedicated video processing boards...[/I]

Todays graphic cards are actually designed to be video processing boards. Another option would be boards like Intel's Phi cards; these are pure processing boards.

In the days of Uleads Media Studio Pro I had a Canopus Raptor card that was specifically designed to do MPEG hardware encode/decode and worked beautifully with the software. However, it could only do one codec and that's it.

Which ever way you turn it, CPUs need help by offloading work and it will always be a matter how well that is implemented.

[I]" Todays graphic cards are actually designed to be video processing boards."[/I]

Not so at all. They're still designed to be Graphics Processing Units e.g. for rasterizing vector graphics. Video is already rasterized so most of what's on a GPU is useless for processing video. Vegas uses Open Compute Language to access the processing on the GPU. The spare power of the GPU is just as useful or useless depending on what has to be done for processing audio or making weather predictions as processing video.

GPUs do seem well suited for processing video when the video is sent to the GPU, processed and then sent directly to the display. That's doable if say it's only doing colour grading. It's also applicable to other dedicated tasks such as adding overlays but realistically the GPU is not a good general purpose processor for handling NLE tasks.

Back in the days of real-time linear editing systems electronics referred to as Digital Video Electronics (DVEs) were used for processing video, such stuff still exists in video consoles / mixers used by broadcasters.

Bob.

For me, all of the negatives on GPU is a moot point.

GPU works on my system and with my video files. I have the 580 card. It gives me a way to preview in real time and really see what I should get without having to spend a lot of time creating proxy files and/or whatever other work-around's there are. Makes rendering to Blu-Ray a huge amount faster!!!

Now, I can load up video files on my system that I normally do not use and/or use rendering methods I normally do not use and find ways to crash the system.

Windows 8 is another problem and makes me wonder if my system can ever successfully be upgraded. I will play with Windows 10 after I get the current project done. Never mess with a system while doing projects!

So, as long as I stay in my safe little box that works, GPU is fine here.

Does there need to be a better way? YES, but for the time being, I will happily stay in my safe little box and get the results I want.

And until there is ACTUALLY a better way, what is the point?

I have an HD camcorder that simultaneously converts a live video stream into HD, applies up to two effects, additionaly color correcting and exposure compensating, encodes to AVCHD, and stores on a memory card in real time. It does all this while running on a tiny 5 volt battery for hours without getting the slightest bit warm. It costs $149. How about taking whatever chip is in that camcorder and putting that in a PC video processing card? Seems like it should be doable for about $50 or so when you consider it's probably one of the cheaper components of the camcorder. How about putting 10 of them on a card? It should still be way cheaper than what folks are paying for GPU video cards.

The fact remains that any GPU video card is still primarily designed for converting 3D vector data into raster data and dumping that to the screen memory as quickly as possible, and almost all of them are optimized for the type of computations used in video games. That they have available computational power left over for other tasks is merely a byproduct. They certainly are not designed for nor intended for helping with NLE video tasks.