By GedaBlaq
Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:19 pm
There, I said it... and if Akai's history of legacy product support is any indication... with very good reason.
I won't go into the other "flagship" products that were unceremoniously dropped related to updates and support because that horse is long dead.
Instead, I'll point out a few things and let you be the judge while I await your comments... good, bad or indifferent.
Before I begin, let me send MAD PROPS to Tutor, Hellfire, Masada, and countless other beta testers of the new MPC 2.0 Software, Live and X. Because of you guys, when I am finally able to afford one of the new standalone machines, I'll be able to make my purchase with confidence knowing that you guys have raised all the BS flags and held AKAI accountable for working out the majority of the kinks.
OK:
AKAI/ NUKAI whatever... invented the Ren, Studio and the original MPC software, as well as 2.0.
a. I assume that since this is the case, in-house programmers wrote the code for the software, as well the drivers for the Ren-Studio hardware/ software firmware interface.
b. Even though I understand that the 2.0 software has been "rebuilt from the ground up" to include sorely needed and much requested features such as Audio Tracks and a completely new mixer section (THANK YOU AKAI), it is still based off of the original MPC software code and interface.
So why is it so difficult and taking so long to "work out the bugs" between 2.0 and Ren/Studio?
c. Let's keep it real.
AKAI never got the REN/ Studio and software quite right in the first place, so why would they reopen an outdated can of worms that's not making them any money? From a sheer business perspective, that's completely ludicrous.
In order to keep the "iconic" thing going, it makes much more sense to completely abandon failed ventures which you're really not experienced with and stick with what you know, which is standalone hardware, i.e. Rhythm Wolf, Tom Cat and Timbre Wolf.
d. Based upon the introduction of the afore mentioned standalone units and in conjunction with the almost dead halt of sales and demand for Ren/ Studios, in my opinion, this was all a steady and purposeful march toward standalone products and away from troublesome software/ hardware hybrids, which were basically R&D money pits FOR AKAI.
Now... Before a debate begins concerning the viability of hybrid products, i.e., Ren/ Studio vs. Maschine, just based upon years in the game alone, AKAI can't hold a candle to Native Instruments in terms of software development experience. Therefore, for NI to develop a pretty damn good controller for their software was a logical and inevitable next step.
e. Lastly, AKAI has a lot of money tied up into the R&D, production, marketing and launch of 2.0, LIVE & X.
So then why would they slow the return of their money by investing further R&D into 5 year old legacy products who's sales and demand have fallen off a cliff?
It just doesn't make any financial and business sense.
Again, if AKAI's history of withdrawal of support for legacy products who's sales have dramatically decreased is any indication as to whether or not 2.0 will be released for the Ren/ Studio, I for one, have chosen to no longer hold my breath and am currently doing my best to save up to buy the LIVE.
In closing, I hope that I am SO wrong.
I still have my originally $1,300 Ren and intend to keep it and would really love to be able to use 2.0 with it.
However, even if I'm right, I guess I can't really be too mad at AKAI because after all... It's just business.
Thoughts?
I won't go into the other "flagship" products that were unceremoniously dropped related to updates and support because that horse is long dead.
Instead, I'll point out a few things and let you be the judge while I await your comments... good, bad or indifferent.
Before I begin, let me send MAD PROPS to Tutor, Hellfire, Masada, and countless other beta testers of the new MPC 2.0 Software, Live and X. Because of you guys, when I am finally able to afford one of the new standalone machines, I'll be able to make my purchase with confidence knowing that you guys have raised all the BS flags and held AKAI accountable for working out the majority of the kinks.
OK:
AKAI/ NUKAI whatever... invented the Ren, Studio and the original MPC software, as well as 2.0.
a. I assume that since this is the case, in-house programmers wrote the code for the software, as well the drivers for the Ren-Studio hardware/ software firmware interface.
b. Even though I understand that the 2.0 software has been "rebuilt from the ground up" to include sorely needed and much requested features such as Audio Tracks and a completely new mixer section (THANK YOU AKAI), it is still based off of the original MPC software code and interface.
So why is it so difficult and taking so long to "work out the bugs" between 2.0 and Ren/Studio?
c. Let's keep it real.
AKAI never got the REN/ Studio and software quite right in the first place, so why would they reopen an outdated can of worms that's not making them any money? From a sheer business perspective, that's completely ludicrous.
In order to keep the "iconic" thing going, it makes much more sense to completely abandon failed ventures which you're really not experienced with and stick with what you know, which is standalone hardware, i.e. Rhythm Wolf, Tom Cat and Timbre Wolf.
d. Based upon the introduction of the afore mentioned standalone units and in conjunction with the almost dead halt of sales and demand for Ren/ Studios, in my opinion, this was all a steady and purposeful march toward standalone products and away from troublesome software/ hardware hybrids, which were basically R&D money pits FOR AKAI.
Now... Before a debate begins concerning the viability of hybrid products, i.e., Ren/ Studio vs. Maschine, just based upon years in the game alone, AKAI can't hold a candle to Native Instruments in terms of software development experience. Therefore, for NI to develop a pretty damn good controller for their software was a logical and inevitable next step.
e. Lastly, AKAI has a lot of money tied up into the R&D, production, marketing and launch of 2.0, LIVE & X.
So then why would they slow the return of their money by investing further R&D into 5 year old legacy products who's sales and demand have fallen off a cliff?
It just doesn't make any financial and business sense.
Again, if AKAI's history of withdrawal of support for legacy products who's sales have dramatically decreased is any indication as to whether or not 2.0 will be released for the Ren/ Studio, I for one, have chosen to no longer hold my breath and am currently doing my best to save up to buy the LIVE.
In closing, I hope that I am SO wrong.
I still have my originally $1,300 Ren and intend to keep it and would really love to be able to use 2.0 with it.
However, even if I'm right, I guess I can't really be too mad at AKAI because after all... It's just business.
Thoughts?
