My only wish is that they would delete MORE threads.

I think this old saying applies here..

"you attract more flies with honey, than vinegar"...

Yeah, but I can think of a thing or two that might win out over honey..


That said, I have never understood why anyone would want to attract flies...

another old saying: "only a hilbilly wastes time figuring out how to attract flies". :)

not sure why most people say that saying anyway: dozens of flies are BAD. Horrible. Many people spend a lot of $$ trying to keep flies to a minimum.

Isn't it "You attract more bees with honey."?

Not that I'd want to attract a swarm of bees either.

I like best: "En la boca cerrada, no entran moscas"

Rob

My only wish is that they would delete MORE threads.

Yeah, like all we want to see are fanboys singing it's praises. There are enough of those on here.

Flies, bees, whatever. They're all bugs. Need I say more.

Bob.

Personally, I like seeing folks report real problems. Gives me the chance to chase em' down and see if I can repro. Flip side, the "Sony you suck" posts do no good for anyone, and no manufacturer/developer seems to be willing to let those slide/fly. Try that on Apple, Adobe, or Avid's fora. doesn't take much to be banned in those communities.

"En la boca cerrada, no entran moscas"

Impertinent English translation: "A closed mouth gathers no foot."

A nice and meaningful variation on the original...

As long as everyone is talking about specific features, as opposed to about people or "Vegas just sux," it may have some value for them, other users, and the developers.

"Yeah, like all we want to see are fanboys singing it's praises. There are enough of those on here."

Yes, I'm a fan of Vegas, but I haven't been a "boy" for nearly half a century. Vegas is solid, never crashes and I make a very, very decent living using it. Now, why exactly wouldn't I be singing its praises?

By complaining in public about some perceived problems with Vegas, you contribute nothing to the success of Vegas and its future. In fact, it could be argued that these complaints could potentially prevent sales and reduce the size of the user base. The more copies of Vegas that are sold allows SCS to spend more on development and hire more higher-priced programmers. So, if you have some constructive criticism, speak up, if you're just going to be pissy and rant about it, then shut the heck up.

Let me make something clear. The thread that was deleted was the one that I started entitled something like "So I think things do not look rosey for Vegas". At teh time they deleted it there were over 50 responses. The bulk of the thread was made up of people saying "ohhh, why are you whinging? Vegas works fine for me. Go somewhere else if you don't like it!" and other people responding with a list of reasons they have problem with it and things they would not only like to see, but expect to see as part of the program.

We are not talking about a bunch of spoiled brats. Apart from the obvious stability, one of the things I mentioned was that I felt the developers were relying too much on covering what should be core feature into the scripting system rather than building things into the core of the program (the batch renderer being a fine example of this).

On the other hand, you get the mirror blind loyal Sony cohort who pop up whenever you complain about anything and say "ooh it works fine on my machine/you are just whinging, your computer must be broken/the third party developers are too lazy/all worship Lord Sony".

Seeing as they felt it was ok to leave several other threads, it makes me think that either they were particularly offended by the fact that I reproduced in it's entirety an email I was sent from Sony encouraging me to go to an demo for Final Cut, in which case, I find it hilarious that Sony PR in not acceptable here.

The other reason may be because actually there were lots of incisive critical comments posted in the thread from a range of people, many of whom have been posting on here much longer than I. It really is not as if people are "bad mouthing" the product. They are responding with long and precise descriptions of their problem, which then justifies the general claim that the software is going downhill.

Either way, by the moderator deleting the entire 50+ thread (I think it was at about 54 responses when deleted) they shed absolutely no light on the Final Cut promotion. If anything they make it look a lot worse. I also think it was crazy to delete all of the debate after it. There were points made in there that would be incredibly valuable to the management team.

But anyway, here I am, having made a considerable investment in time and money developing workflows in my business based around this application. I am in a position where I am having to persevere with the application, then I get an email from Sony encouraging me to switch to Final Cut. If that is not a reason to be concerned, I really do not know what is, and if it is unacceptable to post about here, then what can you say about Sony? If you think that it was unfair of me to write this short original post with the title "Sony, you jokers", well what did you expect me to do? Seeing as they deleted the valid and well crafted concerns in that long thread, what motivation is there for writing more than that (apart from justifying in this very post).

I am convinced Sony just use this forum as a sink to soak up complaints that would otherwise get directed at corporate managers. It is about deflection rather than addressing anything we actually want. I really can not get hover how they seem to completely ignore the reams of useful information and direction we generate here.

"In fact, it could be argued that these complaints could potentially prevent sales and reduce the size of the user base."

Oh I see, now it's my fault that Vegas isn't selling much, and has nothing to do with Sony.

Robert, in this post you sound intelligent and comparatively reasonable. You haven't always come across this way. Surely you realise that the manner in which you state your case makes an enormous difference?

Aggressive put-down statements, both with posts and headings, tend to put people on the back foot and make them defensive. It sounds like you are saying "I'm better than the rest of you mob" - so naturally you reap what you have sown. Humility goes a long way - at least accepting the possibility that whatever problems you are having may or may not be caused by your own system, or some other factor, not always coding errors.

One thing you never seem to acknowledge is that SCS and you share a common interest in wanting this software to be as good as it can be, and if given a reasonable request they are reasonable and responsive. If, as you claim, the Vegas team are hopeless and getting worse, there really is no point in staying with the program, as, it seems, you've already been told by Sony!

Sorry that this sounds preachy, but honestly, ego based complaints achieve nothing good.

Now I'll sit back and wait for Gatesy to try, and fail, to upset me by using his "fanboy" put-down.

"hey shed absolutely no light on the Final Cut promotion." This has been address a number of times, really. SCS is a very small division of "Sony of America" which is a small part of the big Sony of Japan. Now, I did not detail out the exact corporate structure because you can get it from WallStreet or google if you really want to know how small SCS in the SONY Empire. Sony Consumer Electronics Division is the monster in the room in the USA, with Sony B standing in the corner and SCS is in the basement, hiding under the staircase. SCS is not going to be able to question or answer anything about Consumer Electronics without permission, period. The fact that SCS was given permission to market the commercial BluRay mastering software for Sony Japan was a major pat on the back, and Sony's B. is including vegas pro with some cameras is a major plus too. But SCS is the mouse in the Sony's corporate Zoo, so lets be real. This not an excuse for Sony's marketing because there is none needed. But SCS is responsible for its software and I would like to see more changes in this pro product, too. Wasting SCS staff time about things they can not change is really just sad.

I am reasonable in all my posts. Some people just do not want to accept that I have valid complaints. You will be hard pressed to find a message written by me that does not set out perfectly well it's justification and is not also followed up by further clarification for the naysayers. Go back and read some of my posts if think that is not so. I actually think some of my best responses were in that thread that Sony delted.

The fact is that Sony is a brand that has a lot of loyalty and I think a lot of people are personally affronted if you start to question it.

I am happy to put people down when they are trying to rubbish my complaints without basis. I really do not udnerstand the argument of so many people that say "well it works for me, so it must be fine". That really is a truely cretinous argument. And I for one think cretins shoudl be exposed as such eloquently and decisively, and they shoudl certainly never be allowed to get in the way of achieving your aims.

As I have repeatedly said, I made an investment in time and money in integrating Vegas into the development of my business. It is going to be painful to transition, so I am trying to be proactive and give Sony a steer towards fixing it. "Just moving away" is not an option. I say very little that is new on this forum, but I just keep making the same salient points over and over again, and hopefully the userbase here will catch on and start leveraging pressure on Sony to sort their act out.

It's sad to say, but I walked into a pitch a couple of months ago, and when the client's technical guy asked me what software we used, and I told him "Sony Vegas Pro", his face dropped. He said "I've used that, it is not very reliable is it?". Now I'm not saying that lost me the contract, but it is the first time I've mentioned the software and got the response that it is a bit mickey mouse. It does not give a very good reflection on my business. In fact it does not fit my business image at all. That is the last time I shall tell a client we are using Vegas. That is a incredible state of affairs really.

Ok, yes we get it John, you have no problems. However:

1) You can't say that thousands of people have no problems unless you have the evidence. And you don't. If you do, names please ....>

I can give you lots of evidence that plenty of us are having problems. So give us the courtesy of using Sony's forum to complain about it. You can go back to trouble free editing. Like have said before, I have lost plenty of my personal time trying to work around these problems. I am a small business man working in a declining economy. I work aroudn the clock and I am under great pressures. I do not need these little niggly bugs wasting my time. I hear plenty of people saying "if you don't like it, push off", which seems to counter the common sense approach to selling a product, so I would like to know if that is
Sony's opinion too.

2) Yes software can be complicated. But previous versions were rock solid. now it is not.

3) Yes people do have different hardware configurations. However, Vegas supports very little third party hardware, and such hardware does not in general cause the basic bugs and stability issues. Also, it is not like the majority of bugs and stability issues we come across are caused by third party GPUs because Vegas does not support them. Windows is designed to take care of the differences in hardware. Vegas gets handed by the OS a fairly uniform compliment of resources and enviroment across most systems. Arguably device drivers and hardware are much more uniform than they was four or five years ago when Vegas was rock solid.

4) One year down the line from release, I think we are at the point where we can rule out hardware issues for causing stability problems. I have a system full of high end software that works fine, but Vegas 8 is troublesome on it. Vegas 6 worked fine on the same system. What is the variable here? Not the hardware, not my version of Windows, not the tempreture in the case, not hard disk space, it is Vegas 8. Vegas 8 is the variable and Vegas 8 is the problem. Every release we just seem to hear "oh it must be the hardware". This is cop out because then you end up spending ages chasing non-existent problems in drivers, reinstallign windows from scratch (which is entirely pointless) etc. the blame gets endlessly shifted and nothing gets resolved. Then they release a new revision and it starts all over again. No the problem is Vegas. It's code is in a unreliable state and it causes many problems.

5) It seems sily to ask why I was mystified about Sony promoting Final Cut. I wrote my post mainly because I was interested in knowing why Sony was promoting Final Cut. Sony responded by deleting it. So in answer to you question "I don't know why you asked that question" my response is "because I did not know the answer and I wanted to ask the question".

6) You may suspect that they saved on printed my thread, but I suspect they did not.

EDIT:
(This was posted in response to John Cline's now deleted post)

Since version 3, I've done my share to get the word out on Vegas, and subsequently switched a few folks over from Pinnacle and Premiere.

But the bottom line is simply this: If Sony doesn't seem to care about the program, then why should I go out of my way to do so?

I don't live on this board like many of you, so any comments I make shouldn't throw anyone into hissy fits.

MY observations:

#1 People say Vegas 8 is not stable

Never crashed for me, 8a, 8b, 8c, same thing, no crashes.

#2. Black frames, red frames

Never seen any of those

#3. Vegas 8 has problems with Canon 24pf.

No, it does not. I use Canon HV20 set to 24 pf. Using only Vegas' capture, captures perfectly, detects scenes perfectly.

#4. Vegas audio, vs other crap like pro tools.

It is just that , crap comparisons. Using Vegas and FIreface800 I get no latency at all with as many tracks as I need. No freezing, no crashing, works perfectly every time. To be perfectly honest, I don't use VST plugins beacause I use hardware effects. But then again, VST is for amateurs and so called "pros" like Britney and Back street boys' producers and engineers. Those people are pros only because they make money, but so do hookers and they call themselves pros. Doesn't mean they know $hit about audio production.


So why does it work for me and not for others?

Deusx, i have read your post and now I have realised I have got it all wrong. I do not know why I was complaining about these things. How wrong I have been.

Yes, you are right, Vegas 8 is stable and it has never crashed. Nobody has ever seen a black or red frame (all you that have claim to have seen them - just grow up!).

Canon problems? Don't be silly, It works fine.

The thing is, there are plenty of bugs and stability issues I have never had a problem with (the red/black one being a perfect example). I see people reporting them and I would never dream of dismissing them or saying "it doesn't happen for me, so it must work fine". It really does defy belief how insular people can be in this respect. I mean, do they really think they are making it up or something? I would really like to know.

RobertW, I deleted my previous post because you are stressed out and angry and there is nothing I can say or do that will change that. I'm done with you. Good luck with your ailing computers.

By complaining in public about some perceived problems with Vegas, you contribute nothing to the success of Vegas and its future

I have to disagree with this one. By pretending that everything is nice and pink and rosy you do contribute nothing to the success of Vegas and its future. I have no doubt that you have found ways to work with Vegas that makes it run nice and fine and well. This doesn't mean that things are fine. Since Vegas 6 the quality of this product has been in steady decline, and some things are apparently not being looked at at all.

I have a test project with some HDV footage, some DJ transition etc. The project uses 32 bit color space. In 8.0 through, and including version c, Vegas will crash like a Spanair flight while rendering this. Each and every time on each and every computer I have tried it on. This isn't a "perceived" problem, it is a problem.

Black frames... this was not a "perceived" problem. Neither were the red ones. The fact that Vegas + DVDA still is a sub-par solution to creating Blu-Ray disks, far below a Ulead toy product in producing results is not a "perceived" problem.

These (and many others) are real problems that SCS should either have caught in QC or they should have fixed a long time ago. Some of the major problems with Vegas are going on two years old or more.

Chiding people and accusing them of inventing "perceived" problems just so that they can be "pissy" and "rant about" them is not just a little childish. The fact that you do not see those problems just means that you do not use the features where they become apparent.

Interestingly the 64 bit of Vegas has not problem working with 32 bit color on any of the PCs where I have upgraded to Vista 64. Given that two pieces of software from the same software company doing the same render on the same hardware gives different results means that there is most likely a problem in the software. Given that the crash happens at the same time on a number of PCs means that it is not a hardware problem but a problem in Vegas.

And that is not a pissy rant, it is pointing out the fact that SCS released a feature in 8.0 quite some time ago that still doesn't work.