Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 4/26/2006, 3:44 PM
Reading that post with your signature, and that you've had several names on various fora led me to believe this was your post. Goes to show what happens when folks use your name without you knowing about it. I've certainly found myself in that position more than once, right?
My apologies for being under the impression it was your post if in fact, it wasn't.
[edit- To echo Craftech, thank you for all the support you've provided Vegas editors over the past couple of years.]
Cooldraft wrote on 4/26/2006, 4:45 PM
I would think that making tuts via screen capture, or authoring DVDs made WITH the software would help the beta process. When I was beta testing for XP, it seemed to take me roughly twice as long to do something. I would hit a bug, run across undocumented 'features', etc. I believe I remember reading that Light it Right from Vasst was totally done in the new software, I could only guess that Spot had to stop in post, report bugs he ran across making a REAL world DVD, or abnormality, wait for a response/fix from Sony, continue.
Sol M. wrote on 4/26/2006, 6:05 PM
My apologies for assuming that dusterdoo on DVXUser and you are the same person. It appears you are saying that this is not the case.

It appears you have a fan/stalker, as dusterdoo has signed his posts on DVXUser as Jay Mitchell on more than one occasion. Of course, it's entirely possible that there is more than one Jay Mitchell out there, so one could say the confusion may stem from that. However, in a recent post, he signed, "- Jay Mitchell, SCVUG guy. . ."

dusterdoo makes no indication that he is merely quoting you in his posts, so his post's title and your quote together appeared to infer that you were claiming that the HVX would be supported in the 6d update of Vegas.

Once again, my apologies for the mixup.

I hereby retract my statement regarding you claiming that the HVX would be supported in Vegas 6d, but I gotta stick to my guns about "100% factual rumor" sounding like an oxymoron :)
DavidMcKnight wrote on 4/26/2006, 6:26 PM
It appears to me as Dusterdoo is just copying / pasting SCVUG posts without distinguishing if they are from him or Jay.
DJPadre wrote on 4/26/2006, 10:19 PM
i hear ya harold...

when we were testing liquid, we would sit down fo rliek an hour and draw outaplan of attack and literally run the bastard to its knees until it fell over...

but i totally agree 100% with what you have written.. a plan DOES need to be made.. even its made by sony in the form of testing forms with a checklist

as for Jay, he has contributed to this and other forums considerably. I dont see why speculations (whether he posted them or not) have any relevance to Vegas 7 or the way in which it is developed.

craftech wrote on 4/27/2006, 4:20 AM
Kind of a ridiculous thing to attack someone over IMO. Kind of involks a "so what" response from me.

Thanks Jay for all the help you have given to others on the forum who needed it.

John
jkrepner wrote on 4/27/2006, 7:18 AM
Back to Vegas 7... this is a shame, the HD For Indies guy said in reviewing day 3 at NAB, "Went to Sony booth, saw lots, too much to say here. Vegas is 8 bit pipeline, still."

I know, I know, it really doesn't matter for all users, but little things like the above statement hurt Sony Vegas. Well, at least he mentioned it, eh?
apit34356 wrote on 4/27/2006, 7:43 AM
Harold, I heard you. But it is not that hard to have a series of vegs or batches that test all the standard features, then compare the output. After the basic testing, testing in a working environment, different work loads...etc.. With vegas6a, nobody check the basics features completely, or worse yet, check their results. The IT guys probably falsely assume that the vegas trainers, tutorials writers, book authors,..... would be covering the basics as well as the exciting new features. After reviewing some of the books and DVDs, it appears that the authors assume vegas 5 and vegas 6 basics when the same; some authors used vegas 5 for examples of basic features that were in vegas 6. Being a beta tester, trainer and author can be a good thing and "like a double edge sword" can be a bad thing. Beta testing should be first, then the trainer, then author. But the IT guys drop the ball, even if every beta tester screwed up, they should have reviewed the feedback from the betas and had a checklist of features to be tested and working "issues" to be verify. The good news is that Sony was able to keep it out of the "press" and fixed the problem.