Why did they do this after Live 8. The database folder adds to OS drive space. It is slow after you reset it. I had to reset since it was showing files no longer on my system and probably imported that from my Live 9.
When I buy samples they go to my downloads folder. They get unzipped and auditioned then they go to other drives. All of my DAWs have the download folder listed. I can open up any DAW but Live and I can see the new sample pack in a DAW's directory.
I fail to understand why they have this database like this. Most complained about it when Live 9 came out.
Live's database is just plain bad.
-
jestermgee
- Posts: 4500
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:38 am
Re: Live's database is just plain bad.
Because Push
Re: Live's database is just plain bad.
They actually improved it some.kitekrazy wrote:Why did they do this after Live 8. The database folder adds to OS drive space. It is slow after you reset it. I had to reset since it was showing files no longer on my system and probably imported that from my Live 9.
When I buy samples they go to my downloads folder. They get unzipped and auditioned then they go to other drives. All of my DAWs have the download folder listed. I can open up any DAW but Live and I can see the new sample pack in a DAW's directory.
I fail to understand why they have this database like this. Most complained about it when Live 9 came out.
Not as bad as it was when 9 came out but yeah they can make it better.
Re: Live's database is just plain bad.
All the companies in the music production industrial complex are dealing with this issue. How many companies have become content management companies? Abelton, Native Instruments, Steinberg, Arturia, to name just a few. All of these companies not only create music software but also create content. To get that content to the user and add value they must create software that will market and sell the content, sort the content, and make the content usable. No companies want to use the Windows or macOS internal content management systems because they have no control over the data (lost profits).
Yes, Windows File Explorer and macOS Finder would be great: fast, built in search, and we all know how to use it. But companies cannot profit on that. So we are all stuck with countless versions of content management systems that suck. Why? Because you cannot create music software, content, and content management systems and have them all be great at the same time. It's a pick two situation. Ableton is going to pick music software and content. Content management is an afterthought because the user is locked in - you already bought the content, right? Ableton's content manager is for Push and Packs. It's not for you, the user, it's for their bank account.
Think of all the different content management systems you come in contact with during the day. Not just in music production but IRL. It's staggering. All those different interfaces, database styles and philosophies, ratings systems. But for IP issues all slightly different to avoid lawsuits. Think of all the wasted time quickly learning a new content management system. Over and over again.
Yes, Windows File Explorer and macOS Finder would be great: fast, built in search, and we all know how to use it. But companies cannot profit on that. So we are all stuck with countless versions of content management systems that suck. Why? Because you cannot create music software, content, and content management systems and have them all be great at the same time. It's a pick two situation. Ableton is going to pick music software and content. Content management is an afterthought because the user is locked in - you already bought the content, right? Ableton's content manager is for Push and Packs. It's not for you, the user, it's for their bank account.
Think of all the different content management systems you come in contact with during the day. Not just in music production but IRL. It's staggering. All those different interfaces, database styles and philosophies, ratings systems. But for IP issues all slightly different to avoid lawsuits. Think of all the wasted time quickly learning a new content management system. Over and over again.
-
aklisiewicz
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:33 am
Re: Live's database is just plain bad.
anybody knows what database they use ? It looks to me like this is SQLite but never had time to test it...
I use some other products (not music related) which use internal SQLite and it is a common problem. This database is not suited for heavy load and quite limited. It is good for android and small devices. The main problem is indexing and this is what is causing lots of issues (data get corrupted). Switching to MySQL or alike would be much more reliable but will greatly increase the weight of the product.
I use some other products (not music related) which use internal SQLite and it is a common problem. This database is not suited for heavy load and quite limited. It is good for android and small devices. The main problem is indexing and this is what is causing lots of issues (data get corrupted). Switching to MySQL or alike would be much more reliable but will greatly increase the weight of the product.
"You are what you think you are"
Sadarahu
Sadarahu