Oh dear.... another one of these threads...

Half the stuff in that list with regard to avc is just plain story telling. I haven't tested going to the moon yet, but I know the gas tank on my van won't hold enough gas for the trip. GM sucks for that ;)

Sebaz just likes to complain. It's in his nature. It's really hard to take it seriously after a while.

It's curious how many times you said, "I haven't tried this in v9." Well, try it and THEN complain.

It's not curious how many times, because I only said it once, in point 8. In point 2, I only say that I haven't tried that in the 32 bit version of V9, but I did try it in the 64 bit version.

I don't use AVCHD, it isn't ready for prime time in any NLE.

Wrong. AVCHD works just fine in both Premiere CS4 and Final Cut Pro, although I don't like the way FCP handles it because it converts to an intermediate format on import from the camera, and it's not a lossless codec. That, to me, is the advantage of both Premiere CS4 and Vegas, not having to convert to an intermediate format to edit. The problem is, Vegas has all these extra bugs that the editor to deal with.

Give it a rest Sebaz.

Sebaz just likes to complain. It's in his nature. It's really hard to take it seriously after a while.

I don't "like" to complain. I feel compelled to complain when I see lots of people here sucking up to SCS, telling them how great their product is, when it's obvious to me, and many others here too, that their product is not ready for release to the main public and they release it anyway. At least they could be honest and say "If you work with AVCHD, beware that we screwed the pooch and introduced a 4 seconds delay from the moment you press play in the timeline until the video plays at full speed, which didn't happen in either 8.0 or 8.1, but hey, it's the way it is, we're Sony, and we don't really believe in quality control too much", or well, some kind of shorter warning that AVCHD just doesn't work properly. Then, I wouldn't be bitching so much about it. Because no matter that a few people here say that AVCHD is not meant as an editing format, the truth is that Sony allows the format to be used in Vegas, so to me, either do something right or don't it. I don't demand perfection, but no editor likes pressing play and having to wait 4 seconds for it to play at full speed, it's just ridiculous.

And I'd like to add, I was eager for the arrival of Vegas 9 and had already separated those $184 to buy it, but when I saw that not only they had not fixed older bugs in the 64 bit version, but also made AVCHD worse than it was, then I couldn't justify the purchase.

But blink3times, I have a suggestion, since as you put it, it's hard to take me seriously after a while, next time you see a post with my alias on it, just skip it.

Sebaz you were never ready to send $185. Your other posts make that quite clear. I paid $135 for Vegas Pro 8 on the day it became available and you waited 3 months and got it for $120. You bragged about that. You are waiting around for a $100 deal from some place on the net and in the mean time you are trying to make it sound like the product is keeping from spending the money and not your wallet.

In the mean time I have completed several test projects using version 9 and I am working on a new version 9 project that I started yesterday. My big project that is sluggish (not AVCHD) on the time line (like you describe) remains in version 8 and I do my testing that Sony request in the Vegas 9 version. I did what Sony suggested and the sluggish performance improved but not yet where it needs to be. During this time I remain calm but anxious to see what 9a brings.

We have had numerous discussions in the past on software coding, testing, debugging, etc and everything that has to be said about it has been said.

Sebaz my suggestion is the next time you just want to cry the big tears and express them on this forum just skip it. Keep your emotions in check and contribute to solutions as well as problems.

Sebaz you were never ready to send $185. Your other posts make that quite clear. I paid $135 for Vegas Pro 8 on the day it became available and you waited 3 months and got it for $120. You bragged about that. You are waiting around for a $100 deal from some place on the net and in the mean time you are trying to make it sound like the product is keeping from spending the money and not your wallet.

Oh, so I guess you have a way to read my mind and know that I wasn't ready to spend the $185 on Vegas 9. If you know how to read minds, would you please show me how you do it? Or is it a power that only you and a few others have?

Sebaz my suggestion is the next time you just want to cry the big tears and express them on this forum just skip it. Keep your emotions in check and contribute to solutions as well as problems.

Well, sorry to break this up to you, but you don't get to tell me what I can or cannot do, not more than I get to tell you what to do. So I will keep posting my grievances with Vegas here for as long as I use the software and for as long as Sony doesn't fix the most obvious bugs in it. If you want, just don't read my posts.

I would like to add, I just did a pre-render in 9 64 bit of an AVCHD timeline of a 9 minute loop and after the first few frames, all I see is a pure red color in what is supposed to have rendered. So yea, way to go, Sony.