Should Akai charge a fee for future OS updates?

master-ceo, we are all just having a conversation and keeping things civil.

In direct response to your remarks, I am not talking about charging for bug fixes. I am talking about charging for new versions of the OS that completely revamps the product. As I wrote earlier, I have to pay Digidesign $150 if I want to move from Pro Tools 7 to 8. This is not simply a bug fix but a brand new version of the product.

JJ has been successful at releasing a free OS update and 3 new versions of the OS that you have to pay for (MPC 1000/2500). He has added numerous feature requests. In fact, if you read many of the MPC 5000 hate threads, you will find people talking about letting JJ handle the OS. So why shouldn't Akai charge for the same OS update which implements feature requests? The MPC 5000 is a phrase sampler. We have paid $2500 plus for that. But what if they put all the features of the Fusion inside? That should be free? I am a firm believer in getting what you paid for. But none of us has paid for a Fusion or Z8 sampler. None of us has paid for Pac-Man to be added to the MP5K. And we certainly didn't pay for Auto-tune to be included in an MPC. So if these things were added, I think people should pay for them.

Askia Shaheed wrote:master-ceo, we are all just having a conversation and keeping things civil.

In direct response to your remarks, I am not talking about charging for bug fixes. I am talking about charging for new versions of the OS that completely revamps the product. As I wrote earlier, I have to pay Digidesign $150 if I want to move from Pro Tools 7 to 8. This is not simply a bug fix but a brand new version of the product.

JJ has been successful at releasing a free OS update and 3 new versions of the OS that you have to pay for (MPC 1000/2500). He has added numerous feature requests. In fact, if you read many of the MPC 5000 hate threads, you will find people talking about letting JJ handle the OS. So why shouldn't Akai charge for the same OS update which implements feature requests? The MPC 5000 is a phrase sampler. We have paid $2500 plus for that. But what if they put all the features of the Fusion inside? That should be free? I am a firm believer in getting what you paid for. But none of us has paid for a Fusion or Z8 sampler. None of us has paid for Pac-Man to be added to the MP5K. And we certainly didn't pay for Auto-tune to be included in an MPC. So if these things were added, I think people should pay for them.

1) JJ is a software company...

2) you pay 150 dollars for the new version of a DAW that is designed to run on a machine that can hold software by competitors. the 5000 cant hold software by other manufacturers (legally) so it would be pointless for akai to take the role of a software company.

So how do you justify Roland charging me $75 to upgrade my Fantom XR to OS2 with Sample Tools?

This was not free:
http://www.roland.com/products/en/_supp ... &iCncd=738

Askia Shaheed wrote:So how do you justify Roland charging me $75 to upgrade my Fantom XR to OS2 with Sample Tools?

You should ask roland.. I dont work for them like people say you work for akai.

to the original question: if that's what it would take to get the quality of os feature additions that we've seen from japan, then yes, there's no reason why not. it could double or triple the machine's functionality and ease of use.

however the charge would be a lot more than 115 dollars or so, because there are simply less 5000s out there AND more programmers working on it (i assume, anyway, that 1 man is not doing all the software development at akai these days)

jump at the opportunity if it is offered!!!

@Nym
I agree 100%


@ mr_debauch
I feel no need to ask them. I purchased the Fantom XR (as I have the MPC 5000) with a certain feature set. I didn't feel I was entitled to a new OS update that gives me numerous features that were not advertised. I certainly don't demand these features.

But it is really funny to read a few comments here. Just days ago, people were saying JJ should do the OS for the MP 5000 (mostly coming from people that don't use one). But as soon as someone suggest Akai do the same thing....people are against it

Maybe this thread should be renamed to: Should Akai let JJ do the future operating systems of the MPC 5000? Do you care to start this thread?

Askia Shaheed wrote:@Nym
I agree 100%


@ mr_debauch
I feel no need to ask them. I purchased the Fantom XR (as I have the MPC 5000) with a certain feature set. I didn't feel I was entitled to a new OS update that gives me numerous features that were not advertised. I certainly don't demand these features.

But it is really funny to read a few comments here. Just days ago, people were saying JJ should do the OS for the MP 5000 (mostly coming from people that don't use one). But as soon as someone suggest Akai do the same thing....people are against it

Maybe this thread should be renamed to: Should Akai let JJ do the future operating systems of the MPC 5000? Do you care to start this thread?

What would be the point? we all know that the poll would say yes 100% that akai should let JJ make an operating system for the 5000.

Oh, and good for you that you own the fantomXR, but how should I know why roland decided to charge for a newer OS? If it really interests you on why roland justifies charging for it... ask roland.

niigga you is sick,first of all akai fuked up on the first place by switching name from 3500 to 5000,and didn't have enough time to fix sht they should at first place,therefore it's on them to fix thi sht software-wise.Hardware wise i like the unit very much,but i ain't paying for sht they fuked up.

mr_debauch wrote:

What would be the point? we all know that the poll would say yes 100% that akai should let JJ make an operating system for the 5000.

Oh, and good for you that you own the fantomXR, but how should I know why roland decided to charge for a newer OS? If it really interests you on why roland justifies charging for it... ask roland.

If that is the case, than we should be in 100% aggreement that Akai should charge for operating systems which adds feature requests because that is exactly what you get with a JJ OS.

I don't care that Roland charged for an OS update....and I wouldn't care if Akai charged for an OS update which adds new features. That is why my vote is YES.

Askia Shaheed wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:

What would be the point? we all know that the poll would say yes 100% that akai should let JJ make an operating system for the 5000.

Oh, and good for you that you own the fantomXR, but how should I know why roland decided to charge for a newer OS? If it really interests you on why roland justifies charging for it... ask roland.

If that is the case, than we should be in 100% aggreement that Akai should charge for operating systems which adds feature requests because that is exactly what you get with a JJ OS.

I don't care that Roland charged for an OS update....and I wouldn't care if Akai charged for an OS update which adds new features. That is why my vote is YES.

that's great, but i doubt you'd pay extra for new features not advertised on the box of the 5k... for the same reason you said you dont feel you deserve them on your roland. So basically you vote yes for no reason...

I think they own extra features to the loyal supporters just for the fact that they have been missing advertised features due to OS issues or what ever. Those people who went out and bought the 5000 brand new trusted them enough to spend the couple of grand on the mpc standard and were disapointed. Akai owes them.

Right now..almost 70% of the people here responded that a future OS should be free...but it seems 100% of people around here believe Akai should let JJ take over the OS chores. These numbers don't mesh...

in a blind taste test, excellent coding is excellent coding - all they need is an open dialog between developer and user, addressing not only new features but ways of maximizing old features and workflow.

frequent minor updates are far better than infrequent major updates, especially for the testers as they can help steer the development of the os. we've seen that first hand. as a result i've gotten an os that's so streamlined for my personal workflow just by being an obsessive bug reporter.

askia, maybe advise them to open a forum with their developer: let it be heavily moderated!!

I feel I do already, I had to buy a CF card to be able to load 1.02.

I'm a bit worried the lure of cash would steer akai towards developing 'flashy' new features at a price rather than what should be their first priority - a rock solid OS with all features implemented...

The idea of say upto ver 2.9 being free, if stuck to, should mean all the bugs are ironed out before they get onto programming extra features... This I could be persuaded to agree with..

Some things should definitely be free... bug fixes obviously... the manual says you can view cc's in grid edit - and you can use the locate on step/grid edit - which you cant, extra options for some of the effects (like the phaser parameters in the manual which dont appear in the OS) synth modulation routing options and more extensive q link control for the synth should be free. Better Grid edit view for midi (scroll screen by note, not just be octave - which is a pain).. Streamlined operation like more uses for the shift key should be free... I could go on but I'll save it for another of my posts in the features request thread.... you get the picture

In return for us 5k owners splashing out the cash and effectively testing the system we should get a solid machine tailored specifically to (and to a certain extent by) the needs of its users... (through this forum & talking directly to akai)

If _after_ that they want to offer extra features (multiband compressor on the master comp section anyone?) - if its reasonably priced... I would probably go for it... I'm not fussed who writes it... (although I never tried JJ OS on my 1k so I cant speak from experience on that score)...

I just dont want to dangle our cash in front of the people at Akai _just_ yet... I want to see them deliver on a fully featured no-corners cut system first - for the price I think we deserve it....

I think it could be done. They could create two teams. The first team would do nothing but ensure that the current feature sets works 100%. They would not change a single function. They would give you exactly what it was advertised to do.

The second team would work on new features. This should not impact what the first team is doing.

Users will have several options.....OS 1, which would be free; OS 2 (MPC 4000XL equivalent), which would cost $199; OS 3 (The Fusion), which would cost $399. Consumers will get exactly what they pay for.