Comments

Grazie wrote on 10/17/2016, 2:03 PM

No. 

ByronK wrote on 10/17/2016, 11:56 PM

Currently, Pluraleyes is not supported.  Any ideas when it will be?

Thanks.

No PE support for VP14. This was a deal-breaker for me & I had the $$ set asside to upgrade. I purchased something else w/ the money.

OldJack wrote on 10/18/2016, 10:33 AM

I bought not knowing 14 was a "down grade".  I now only use 13 because I do multi 5 camera video and PE is my main necessary plugin.  Also 13 is stable and 14 crashes all the time with my .m2t formats. 

NickHope wrote on 10/18/2016, 10:37 PM

I bought not knowing 14 was a "down grade".  I now only use 13 because I do multi 5 camera video and PE is my main necessary plugin.  Also 13 is stable and 14 crashes all the time with my .m2t formats. 

Please stop repeating this same "down grade" complaint on multiple threads. In advance of VP14 there was much discussion about potential issues with plugin compatiblity. There is a trial version of VP14 that you could have used to ensure it met your needs. If PE is your "main necessary plugin" then it would have been advisable to check that it works before purchasing. Presumably a refund is/was also available if you are not happy with the software.

ushere wrote on 10/18/2016, 10:56 PM

for once nick i'm sorry to have to disagree with you - i perceive 14, especially now that it's in wider use and the reports are coming in, as a 'downgrade' as well. i wish it was otherwise.

i always avoid being on the cutting edge, you bleed to death too quickly, so i waited... (i also waited for the imaginary existing13 users discount that never eventuated), much of my work revolves around various plugins, some of which i've paid a great deal for, others have generously given for free by loyal vegas users, either way, they're not working in 14 - my observation is simple - i can't run a business with broken tools.

add to this that there hasn't been any serious work done with the underlying gpu problems, and apparently that other somewhat serious bugs have been introduced i don't see how it can be described any other way...

 

 

NickHope wrote on 10/18/2016, 11:48 PM

for once nick i'm sorry to have to disagree with you - i perceive 14, especially now that it's in wider use and the reports are coming in, as a 'downgrade' as well. i wish it was otherwise.

I attempted to make an objective analysis to the VP14 situation in this comment in reply to one of OldJack's previous "down grade" complaints. The point in my comment on this thread is not about the merits of VP14 but rather that repeated complaints across multiple threads are unnecessary, and also to point out how the complainer might have avoided wasting his money and perhaps get it back.

ushere wrote on 10/19/2016, 12:55 AM

as ever nick, appreciated - i should get out and about more ;-)

NickHope wrote on 10/19/2016, 1:14 AM

i should get out and about more ;-)

You're not the only one!

OldJack wrote on 10/19/2016, 12:01 PM

@Nick Hope, I have only call it a downgrade once before this thread.  When VP13 was a solid software and VP 14 is not I call that a downgrade.  Sure VP14 has new support for some new formats but it has completely disregarded the best features of VP13.... that is VP13 works.  Look at all the problems of non support and crashes reported here for VP14.  One might think VP14 intentionally trashed VP13 and called it an upgrade.