Feature request: delay compensation

Options
13»

Comments

  • colB
    colB Member Posts: 836 Guru
    Options

    :)

    Among the many indications that the company has zero interest in developing this software, this is top five. If this can't be done, nothing else can.

    My kneejerk reaction would be to agree, but given that they just rewrote the core compiler for ARM to support Apple silicon, it seems somewhat unfair to suggest that NI are not interested in developing Reaktor!

    Just have to accept that one persons top 5 needed features are not the same as another's, and there are plenty of potential reasons why this one hasn't been added yet, particularly given that we (experienced builders who are also programmers) are a tiny minority of the user base!

    My main motivation for taking part in this thread at all is to try and counter the "Reaktor is dead" rhetoric. It really is unnecessary, and it's potentially damaging - that kind of nonsense can be self fulfilling in the days of social media and google. So lets try to avoid that narrative please!

  • Laureano Lopez
    Laureano Lopez Member Posts: 102 Advisor
    edited May 2023
    Options

    I meant top 5 indications etc, not features. I've had to make manual adjustments for this, but it's not the end of the world. All the other things I mentioned are more important. They're also way harder to implement.

    I get what you say about a self fulfilling prophecy, but I think we're past that point. The internet has been littered with this stuff for years now. The company made stringent efforts to unbuild any trust on its whole line of products. If anything, the continued demands of the userbase are a better indication of the products' life than anything the company has done. Otherwise it really looks like nobody cares, everyone is happy to keep running their abandonware forever, with the occasional, forced platform port, which I'm sure someone had to fight for. In any case, there's no next version without new features: who would buy that? This is not a narrative, it's a chain of facts or lack of them. I don't think anyone can seriously blame rhetorics for whatever happens with NI.

  • Z Gabr
    Z Gabr Member Posts: 52 Helper
    edited May 2023
    Options

    In fact, what is most annoying is the lack of any information from NI about the requested features.

    This has been going on for years - absolutely no feedback on the requested features....

  • KoaN
    KoaN Member Posts: 106 Advisor
    Options

    Instead of replying "not in the plan right now..." to pretty much each requests they probably choose to be silent.

    After this whole apple stuff that lasted years and now that it is done,probably some things to iron out i still feel hopeful they will shift their focus on updating and thinking about the builders,maybe not to the degree we want and for how much time i don't know but still hopeful they will get back in touch soon unless another unpredictable thing happens and shift the ressources elsewhere again.

  • Z Gabr
    Z Gabr Member Posts: 52 Helper
    edited May 2023
    Options

    In fact, I think developer responsiveness is very, very important... If a developer wants to attract more people to his products, he should give users feedback... As an example, I can cite the very responsive attitude towards users of Justin Frankel (Cockos Reaper) ... His team is very responsive and gives feedback on requested features quite often, not to mention quite a few requested features have been implemented... So why is there such a viscous silent quagmire regarding Reaktor?

    It's a clear disregard for the users who feed this clumsy, voracious machine.......

  • KoaN
    KoaN Member Posts: 106 Advisor
    Options

    I agree with all of that.

    I feel Reaktor's team is stuck between a rock and a hard place...they can't say much.The company has had a few big changes,it feels like Reaktor was put on hold for a while not in priority.We can get angry at the big company for sure but Reaktor's small team probably feels frustrated as well,that is my impression.I remember George saying something like they had ideas on how to improve Reaktor but they had to follow the orders.

    We are a damn patient userbase that is for sure hehe.

  • Laureano Lopez
    Laureano Lopez Member Posts: 102 Advisor
    Options

    Devs can't have a road map if they're barely holding to their jobs.

    It's my impression that after Schmitt left, management tried to bring the company to the kind of fast revenue you'd expect from a startup. This is absurd -NI is an established company, with an established line of products. Trying to outcompete new business from that position is doomed to crash. But it happens all the time. Stable business is both stressful and boring, so founders leave to try new things at a smaller scale, or retire, or both. Then the people in charge only care about revenue, which is ok per se, but it's a narrow perspective. Sometimes you're lucky enough to be bought by the japanese, who tend to not fall for this kind of nonsense. Sometimes you're very unlucky and you get bought by Avid.

    Sometimes you're NI, and you feel suddenly threatened by a shiny open source platform. I found Blocks very concerning from the start. It was a nice idea -it wasn't nice to see the company completely focused in that direction. Reaktor is the wrong tool for that. An open architecture made of little boxes needs the internals to be very efficient. You exchange access to inner detail for mid-level flexibility. Blocks gives you accessible but very complicated internals with reduced flexibility and awful performance.

    Reaktor is great for ad-hoc solutions to small-scale ideas. It's great for pure DSP, terrible for UI or interfacing in general. It's also incomplete, it lacks things that are basic for its core functionality. It's good for prototyping, but making big, complicated stuff with Reaktor is awful work for mediocre results. Reaktor is in the zone of Max for Live or Bitwig's Grid. That didn't feel very startup-ish in 2015, so they neglected its strengths to divert it out of its domain. Who could foresee that wouldn't work?

    Now we're in the middle of a global crisis hitting this industry particularly hard, and NI churns out sample libraries like a vending machine. It's certainly not the time to expect a road map for anything, let alone Reaktor. I just hope it survives the storm, but with Francisco Partners at the wheel, I don't expect a change of course.

  • Kubrak
    Kubrak Member Posts: 2,816 Expert
    Options

    I think, they had to allocate pretty much resources to AS transition. They could also make bigger or smaller changes in overall code....

    So, maybe Reaktor gets more care now. My guess is that if NI invested money to AS transition they plan develop it even further.

    Otherwise, NI would not kill Super 8 and return back to Reaktor version. NI has killed Absynth which would be much easier to port to AS (I guess) than Reaktor... So, Reaktor must shine on NI roadmaps, I guess.

  • Z Gabr
    Z Gabr Member Posts: 52 Helper
    edited May 2023
    Options

    All we have is just guesses... And all because for years there has been no feedback from the Reaktor developers on any of the requested features...

  • Kubrak
    Kubrak Member Posts: 2,816 Expert
    Options

    That is right. But the same was true for other NI products. And it slowly changes. Traktor has some sort of public roadmap for example.

    We will see, if anything has changed also for Reaktor in this respect....

  • salamanderanagram
    salamanderanagram Member Posts: 4 Member
    Options

    reaktor isn't going anywhere. it's a sizable part of NI's ecosystem, they have like, a dozen products that depend on it.

    but if you look at the history of updates over the last 15 years, they invariably are linked to new products. we got the sine and modal banks, because there was prism and razor to sell. there were some overhauls made (mostly for the worse) to make reaktor player a thing. we got some new stuff with reaktor 6, but it pretty much all tied to blocks and an attempt to make that into a commercial marketplace. they updated to use on new apple hardware, because they have to, for the future. same thing with VST3.

    tldr; we'll only get the features you want if they are necessary for an NI product. i don't blame the reaktor team for this, but at a corporate level, i wish NI were willing to invest more in reaktor.

  • Z Gabr
    Z Gabr Member Posts: 52 Helper
    edited May 2023
    Options

    For me, there are several key points that determine whether I stay with the reaktor or not ... One of the important points is delay compensation ... Since my goal is to create quality complete tools that do not require third-party "crutches".

  • Flexi
    Flexi Member Posts: 366 Pro
    Options

    This is how it is right here.

    AS and VST3 in Reaktor was life support for a whole slew of products they currently ship, in some ways it worked out well, if a lot of those product had been VST, they would have just been discontinued (Absynth)

Back To Top