Bug Fix:MPC2500 OS-XL Ver2.30 10-AUG-2011

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bug Fix:MPC2500 OS-XL Ver2.30 10-AUG-2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. [Input Thru]

The value of SEND of FX is not memorized.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bug Fix:MPC2500 OS-XL Ver2.30 10-AUG-2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. [Input Thru]

The value of SEND of FX is not memorized.

someone can cite a jj operating system, free from bugs?
someone could respond back to akai OS, but I have paid, I am living a continuous scam?
say again
I paid 123 dollar. for what?

bugs, bugs and more bugs. always bugs!

I have another 2500,
os1 paid and os2,
what version is bug free?

since you left and you ignore the posible os2 continuity!

Sooty_G wrote:bad news from JJ:

"Since it was with obstacles in order to add a new function, the specification of Q-LINK was changed.
Therefore, specification cannot be returned."

so that's that.
i'm giving serious thought about going back to OS 2 now.

i don't like the fact that JJ is not a musician, yet making decisions about how my musical instrument operates. we have to face the reality that JJ does not make money by supporting and bug-fixing code - he makes it by introducing novelty: new features that you have to pay for to get.

this wouldn't be a problem except he is dealing with a closed box: the MPC has very little room for codespace and no way to upgrade the hardware. so as he keeps adding features to insure his income stream, he has to keep taking away other things. as a programmer and not a musician (and also motivated by his need to keep his cashflow going), his decisions are a little suspect.

it's when he takes away CORE features of the MPC ( Q-LINK recording, Q-REAL edit, and MIXER AUTOMATION for gods sakes! ) in order to bring in some new features that have more limited appeal that we run into problems in my opinion.

i don't remember anyone asking for CHORD or ARPEGIATOR mode, EQH & EQL, the little envelope graphs in GPE, sequence rearranging, etc. these are all features that i'm happy to use, but when they come at the expense of some more basic things then forget it.

i'm tired of the constant feature swap, the worrying about what feature will be killed next, the constant loss of compatibility with old projects... you get used to a way of working and then have to re-adjust everything when JJ pulls something out. if that's what he's going to do then he needs to make the OS MODULAR! have a list of available features, you pick the ones that are important to you, and then you get the OS made. or maybe have 3 different versions of the current OS available (with the current features) that we can choose from. maybe people would buy more than one version and JJ would even end up making more money that way.

i'm willing to bet any one of us uses the MPC to make music FAR more than JJ does ( if at all ). the artists should be the ones steering the development of the tool. but right now it's JJ's way or the highway. OS 2XL came out of nowhere and it was take it or leave it. in my opinion he's giving bells and whistles while taking away solid fundamentals.

I don't get your point.

There are bugs in every system. You find some in JJ OS, you report them, they get fixed. Usually very fast. That's how it works. Have you ever used Reaper? Very similar: frequent updates/bug fixes. I call it good customer service. Something Akai, for example, doesn't seem to be capable of.

So, what is your problem?

Jungleman wrote:I don't get your point.

There are bugs in every system. You find some in JJ OS, you report them, they get fixed. Usually very fast. That's how it works. Have you ever used Reaper? Very similar: frequent updates/bug fixes. I call it good customer service. Something Akai, for example, doesn't seem to be capable of.

So, what is your problem?

It's the whole issue with the Q-Links being limited and having functionality taken away, while other features that are not as useful get added. I understand his point entirely, as well as so many others who will agree. It really isn't fair to take away functions that we paid for and relied on in the past. So I can understand the frustration and I'd really like to have all Q-Link functionality back again as well.

frequent bugfixes does not mean more bugs than other software, it just means more attention is being paid to them.

problem: software is hard to write. extensive testing is required to find/reproduce/eliminate bugs.

result: someone must find bugs, and a developer must fix them. THE DEVELOPER CANNOT FIND ALL THE BUGS THEMSELVES.

devs can do the following:

A- release am update (1.0, 2.0, etc) and fix bugs/add features at each release
B- release "point releases" addressing issues as users find them.

B is much more useful to the user than A. A results in more bugs, more frustration, and more time between releases. B results in frequent updates and more user-driven
development.

distortedtekno wrote:It really isn't fair to take away functions that we paid for and relied on in the past. So I can understand the frustration and I'd really like to have all Q-Link functionality back again as well.

to be fair though you never paid for that in os2xl. you paid for it in os2, and it's still there. you can't get pissed at honda if their newest model doesn't have a cassette player when their old one did.

Jungleman wrote:I don't get your point.

Have you ever used Reaper?

no,
I never would,
before I put my hand into the flames.

Jungleman wrote:So, what is your problem?

problem?

I had never tasted anything so, buggy! it´s the problem.
Have you seen my videos on youtube?

To read this link in Spanish, please?
http://www.kikachu.com/blog/2010/03/30/ ... -con-bugs/

I often run on OS1, even if my 2500 is XL-enabled.

OS can be easily swapped, and if you arrange your folders accordingly, you can use the features you need when you need it.

Shall the workflow be that rigid? Not all songs have to use all hardware features always.

It's like when you record a track with a 60's electric guitar: the tremolo won't be as precise as a Floyd-Rose and you won't be able to drop down strings dramatically.

Maybe instead you chose to rock the old lady because of something else... and even if you would have to tune her every 10 minutes, you don't give a fcuk because of some other feature, functional to the music you are doing.

So, when bugs are fixed that quickly (and it's quick) we could just be grateful. Old versions are always there.

And AKAI OS is still free.

PEACE

I am looking for someone millionaire, who wants to share his fortune with me.
It would be appreciated on my part.

this cracks me up every time, by the way

It is buggy, and I don't like how inaccurate and random the timing of recorded audio tracks are, but, there's movement. Because the MPC is closed source, without JJ OS the alternative is absolutely no changes, and non-responsive support who ignore your emails or say they'll look into it without ever releasing anything new.

Ideally there'd be new dedicated hardware being released, with modern specs, instead of the ancient ones that limit the OS. Ideally it would be open source, so we could have many JJs to choose from, and more opportunity to customize our tools to meet our specific preferences. But that's not what we have. So, thanks for the bug fix.

This thread has to have a response.Really he is in it only for the money?JJ has made improvements
to this O.S. I do not think anybody,even AKAI,thought possible.If you do not understand the limits in
programming such a small O.S. and the amount of midi JENIUS JJ is.Time to go back to AKAI O.S
for some cave man beat making.

just because you see bug fixes, doesnt mean its more buggy. All software, all programming, anything with code, even if you're the best programmer in the world, something this complex, has bugs. its a fact and a rule - and i guarantee all other software you are using is in the same situation - and just because you dont notice the bugs, dont mean they are not there - it means you havent used it in a fashion to expose the bugs.

think about how far jjos is pushing the OS, quickly too - and think about this small community around it. you get to be part of the action. you get to give you input, feedback, test, suggestions, and see the results really quickly. we all get to be part of the development team...thats friggin awesome.

so you can be glad to be a part of it, or you can be salty about it.

and I do agree with sally, it does suck when a feature goes missing. but nym does have a point, 2xl is not 2. they are differant OS.

one last thing i do have to say, you can be mad about this stuff, and approach it that way(pissed off, and bitter), and if JJ is like any of us, he won't respond or appreciate that mentatlity and be less likely to be open to your ideas..................but if you work with him, treat the situation with respect, and have valid concerns,feature requests, etc. you'll probably get a better response...

If I was working on a development project and a tester came up to me and said "whats your problem, why did you take away my favorite button! you jerk! you told me there was going to be a button!" .....................I'd probablly say go **** off, you are 1 out of thousands of users, I dont have time for this!!!! I had to remove the button because you asked for a menu, you idiot........ and I just spent 2 months getting that menu to work.........wait.what? you dont want the menu anymore? go **** youself...(I prob wouldn't say it outloud but i'd for sure be thinkin it)

think about it. you can't approach it in a pissed off manner because the developer has alot more on his mind than 1 feature for 1 person. and if you rub the only guy with the keys the wrong way, you just **** up! lol and to be frank, in this situation majority does rule. it doesnt make sense for JJ to invest his time on 1 thing for 1 person. It makes more sense to prioritize the requests that will please the majority and solve the most unresolved issues..............

Suggestion: lets participate in the existing qlink thread, but keeping it positive, mentioning some of the old features we miss, and why, and maybe posting some good ideas of what we'd like to happen with qlink.............maybe jjos will agree if he sees everyone's positive concerns.

peace

peace.

he's doing us a favor by updating so i can't complain everytime i see an update. i hope im not the only one though who sees the arp and chord function to be pretty damn useless.

Yeah, Q links are greater than chord mode and ARP mode, although ARP mode is growing on me.

Maybe he had to change the Q link functions to be able to use them in edit modes and such.

I do appreciate that, but I hope there will be the return of two simultaneous recordable Q links, and more importantly, LAYERABLE Q link edits so you can automate more parameters than what is presently assigned to the slider.

No doubt Nym. I'm not angry or anything. But still hopeful for simultaneous recordable q-links, as elmacaco had mentioned.