L6 arrangement slowness bugfix?

brainray · Post by **brainray** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:25 pm

I wonder if the buggy and slllllooooowwwwwww arrangement window will see a fix. Any news about that?

Ray

peeddrroo · Post by **peeddrroo** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:32 pm

up to now, it's still bad news on this issue in the alpha version.

we're pushing the abes hard.

deva · Post by **deva** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:39 pm

that is bad news

supster · Post by **supster** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:42 pm

.

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:53 pm

I wouldn't call that a bug. it's working properly. it's just slow. which means it works but it's just doesn't work as fast as you would like. but a bug would be if it was intended on being fast and it wasn't

ilia · Post by **ilia** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:05 pm

deva wrote:that is bad news

indeed, very sad.

deva · Post by **deva** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:08 pm

Johnisfaster wrote:I wouldn't call that a bug. it's working properly. it's just slow. which means it works but it's just doesn't work as fast as you would like. but a bug would be if it was intended on being fast and it wasn't

so what you are saying is that they intended it to be slow... That's worse than it being a bug

peeddrroo · Post by **peeddrroo** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:08 pm

it's still an alpha though.
hopefully it will be sorted when its ready.
there's still some time left....

Meef Chaloin · Post by **Meef Chaloin** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:09 pm

i find that very odd, didnt alex said that it was somehting to do with the architecture of the program (or something like that) and that that was the reason they couldnt do much in v5?

deva · Post by **deva** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:11 pm

true, that is the sort of thing you can expect still... I've been a beta tester for other software and alphas can be slow, especially if there is debug code in there

people hoping for more features at this point will mostl likely be disappointed

diverdee · Post by **diverdee** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:21 pm

Meef Chaloin wrote:i find that very odd, didnt alex said that it was somehting to do with the architecture of the program (or something like that) and that that was the reason they couldnt do much in v5?

I tremember that also, as that's a particular issue i've been following.
One would hope that's something they will have fixed, as that seemed to be the intimation in Alex' comments.

kineticUk · Post by **kineticUk** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:22 pm

Oh dear.

ilia · Post by **ilia** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:30 pm

peeddrroo wrote:it's still an alpha though.
hopefully it will be sorted when its ready.
there's still some time left....

it's hard to believe that after so many complaints they would't give it enough priority when working on 6. if it's still there now after a year of development, it probably means that it's buried so deep in the code, that it's not something they can change during the bug-fixing stage. wait another year and hope.

just being pessimistic. I personally stayed on 4 because of this.

brainray · Post by **brainray** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:33 pm

Johnisfaster wrote:I wouldn't call that a bug. it's working properly. it's just slow. which means it works but it's just doesn't work as fast as you would like. but a bug would be if it was intended on being fast and it wasn't :)

Sorry sir, but if it works so slow that I think the computer has crashed, it is a bug.

Anyway, call it bug, call it a feature request - this behaviour is completely unacceptable.

I just remixed a complete album, and in the end the client came to make some final tweaks. God, I can't tell you how I felt, when Live took like 20 seconds to duplicate those few 30 tracks... "Why don't you use Logic like the years before?" It was a very hard day.

You can't sell that behaviour. And when working in the studio, like 80% of all DAW users need an arrangement view.

If it's true that there is no fix in 6, then Ableton has become just another company that just wants to sell new features instead of fixing bugs.

Best

Ray

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:39 pm

for some reason copy and paste is totally fast and dragging is slow. I think dragging will always be slow. I'm sure they want it to be fast but I think it's the nature of the way live does things that there is not going to be a way to do it. I personally think thats why they made dual core work because they knew they couldn't make the program faster so they decided the best idea would be to better utilize the power of the computers out there.

doesn't really help us non dual core people.

but I just stick with copy paste and I'm fine.