Where is the October update?

[Loque]

Then they should leave out the Soundpacks etc. and concentrate on the essential things...
Very bad start of the roadmap.

If you still didnt noticed it, the packs are mostly (or all) made by other sound designers and sound designing is NOT code writing, so do not expect a sound designer to write code.

[guitfnky]

that’s not how agile works.

Maybe you should spend more time looking into it from a software development perspective especially when it's linked to an investment fund

Not my words

A brief history of Agile software development
In the 1990s, software development faced a bit of a crisis. Referred to as ‘the application development crisis’ or ‘application delivery lag’, the industry realized that it couldn’t move fast enough to meet customer demands and requirements—the estimated time between a business need and actual application was about three years. See, traditional development models were based on a timeline approach, where development happened sequentially and the final product wasn’t revealed to customers until the very final step. This left little room for flexibility when it came to progress reviews and changes. So, by the time an actual application was finished, it was highly likely that requirements and systems of the project’s original objectives had changed.

With time, money, and efforts wasted, and even some projects cancelled halfway through, professional leaders of the software community thought it was time for a new, refreshed approach. Then in 2001, in a snowy, ski lodge in Utah, a group of industry practitioners gathered to discuss industry practices. Though the meeting was set up with a primary focus on the discussion of development cycles, some participants were already entertaining the idea of a new software development method. They all yearned to cement a process that legitimized what was being practised, and so, came the creation of the Agile Manifesto.


Me again,

This crap has been going on for years but now our beloved Reason has been dragged into the philosophy which might sound great until you realise that it's all about the hype and money not about the product or community.

None of what we the "community" have suggested has become a reality until it made financial sense to the investors who use marketing strategy to entice customers into handing over cold hard cash wanted it to.

we are not the target being enticed with the current strategy it's other invester who will see the increases in account sign ups and understand nothing about the product or industry and just believe that increased interest produces increased profits.

James the marketing guy has been on ReasonTalk on and off during this whole time this thread was created and has kept quite,

not one single post or response to questions being asked which completely goes against the manifesto,

fact is it's just another buzzword that the marketing/investment team want to hear being used no more no less and our conversation is pointless, hence why I decided to post music videos as it is more productive and inspiring until the powers that be stepped in to request I get on topic or get lost

it’s great that you’ve mastered the use of google’s internet search feature, but I work on an agile team for software development, so…

[nickb523]

Then they should leave out the Soundpacks etc. and concentrate on the essential things...
Very bad start of the roadmap.

If you still didnt noticed it, the packs are mostly (or all) made by other sound designers and sound designing is NOT code writing, so do not expect a sound designer to write code.

Indeed Loque is correct. The sound packs are outsourced to companies like my own and it's all administrated internally by a completely different department. Leaving out the packs would do absolutely nothing to speed up development of the core app. We'd simply end up with the same delay and a content drought to boot!

[rootwheel]

Agile does have a place. But it needs to work alongside very clear goals (features and budget set by management), and very clear deadlines (often set by marketing/sales).

The problem is that even when it is failing as a process, when standards aren't being met; when the lack of quality is perhaps even causing genuine reputational damage; somehow Agile is still never blamed. It is still often seen by management as being the only desirable, modern and trendy way to work. It would be too embarrassing to be seen to be changing back to the good old fashioned ways of the waterfall methodology. That would be real failure - not putting out sub-standard product!

Even when Agile clearly isn't working, it somehow still seems to be immune to criticism. I don't understand it myself. It's like a fundamentalist faith; a closed loop. The starting premise is that Agile itself is the perfect modern work system and if you're not getting the results it's because you're not doing Agile properly. The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.

To me it's just another way in which the modern world has gone mad; common sense yet again trumped by ideology.

[EnochLight]

Very bad start of the roadmap.

Not really. You'd rather them release an update in another unfinished state that's buggy? I'd most certainly rather they stick to fixing it and making it the best it can be before trying to adhere to some "roadmap" that they very clearly said was NOT a promise. But I get YMMV...

[Loque]

Agile does have a place. But it needs to work alongside very clear goals (features and budget set by management), and very clear deadlines (often set by marketing/sales).

...The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.
...

Lets wait for the next buzzwordbullsh!tbingo!

[danc]

Agile does have a place. But it needs to work alongside very clear goals (features and budget set by management), and very clear deadlines (often set by marketing/sales).

The problem is that even when it is failing as a process, when standards aren't being met; when the lack of quality is perhaps even causing genuine reputational damage; somehow Agile is still never blamed. It is still often seen by management as being the only desirable, modern and trendy way to work. It would be too embarrassing to be seen to be changing back to the good old fashioned ways of the waterfall methodology. That would be real failure - not putting out sub-standard product!

Even when Agile clearly isn't working, it somehow still seems to be immune to criticism. I don't understand it myself. It's like a fundamentalist faith; a closed loop. The starting premise is that Agile itself is the perfect modern work system and if you're not getting the results it's because you're not doing Agile properly. The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.

To me it's just another way in which the modern world has gone mad; common sense yet again trumped by ideology.

Good points well made. Most of the time - it has nothing to do with the process being followed (waterfall or agile) ... it's just the fact you have the wrong people on your team. MOST software developers are just below average. Meaning - the chances of success is extremely unlikely.

[MrFigg]

...The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.
...

Lets wait for the next buzzwordbullsh!tbingo!

Didn’t someone say it was Groovebox?

[DaveyG]

Not really. You'd rather them release an update in another unfinished state that's buggy? I'd most certainly rather they stick to fixing it and making it the best it can be before trying to adhere to some "roadmap" that they very clearly said was NOT a promise. But I get YMMV...

I agree 100%. Roadmaps, by their very nature, have to tend towards the optimistic side. They are what the team would like to achieve if things go smoothly. We all know things don't always go smoothly but you can hardly produce a roadmap that assumes the worst. That would just depress everyone!

[guitfnky]

Even when Agile clearly isn't working, it somehow still seems to be immune to criticism. I don't understand it myself. It's like a fundamentalist faith; a closed loop. The starting premise is that Agile itself is the perfect modern work system and if you're not getting the results it's because you're not doing Agile properly. The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.

To me it's just another way in which the modern world has gone mad; common sense yet again trumped by ideology.

THIS. my company has spent the better part of the year transitioning to agile, and this is my exact experience with it. no matter how loudly the developers shout that the agile approach we’re taking isn’t working, or this new tool isn’t suited for the task at hand, or we can’t break this work effort into tidy two-week sprints, we’re always met with this exact response. ‘let’s try a different method of shoehorning this thing that doesn’t fit into an agile approach’.

agile CAN be great, if it’s used the right way, but it’s not always the best approach. there can be no such thing as a single best approach for everything.

[artotaku]

Agile does have a place. But it needs to work alongside very clear goals (features and budget set by management), and very clear deadlines (often set by marketing/sales).

The problem is that even when it is failing as a process, when standards aren't being met; when the lack of quality is perhaps even causing genuine reputational damage; somehow Agile is still never blamed. It is still often seen by management as being the only desirable, modern and trendy way to work. It would be too embarrassing to be seen to be changing back to the good old fashioned ways of the waterfall methodology. That would be real failure - not putting out sub-standard product!

Even when Agile clearly isn't working, it somehow still seems to be immune to criticism. I don't understand it myself. It's like a fundamentalist faith; a closed loop. The starting premise is that Agile itself is the perfect modern work system and if you're not getting the results it's because you're not doing Agile properly. The Agile ideologues reaction is always the same: a stricter and more complete application of it - rather than accepting that it simply does not fit for a particular piece of work or business.

To me it's just another way in which the modern world has gone mad; common sense yet again trumped by ideology.

Quite amusing that we discuss software development methodologies in a music forum

But since we are at it and it´s about software, IMHO it comes down to the individuals and the team and how they act as professionals. There were successful waterfall projects in the past. No methodology will help if a team does not care about quality standards or is a bunch of rookies.
A common pitfall is that a methodoloy should fit every project and every team just because it is en vogue. That´s why I´m more a fan of tailoring methodologies rather than following something rigidly. As an example, we don´t do daily standups. We do it bi-weekly and it had no negative effect on our project success. I don´t mean that a team should leave stuff away just because it is lazy but it should evaluate what makes sense to keep.

There is a running gag of a new methodology called inverted waterfall. First we did the implemention and then we thought about the design. And the design always worked out

[rootwheel]

Quite amusing that we discuss software development methodologies in a music forum

I don't really know if Reason Studios are using Agile, but they definitely seem to be going for quantity and not quality with their updates these days:

Reason 12 - 4 updates so far (only been out 2 months)
Reason 11 - 14 updates in around 2 years
Reason 10 (inc. engine optimisation) - 9 updates in around a year and a half
Reason 9 (inc. VST tech) - 6 updates in around a year and a half
Reason 8 - 5 updates in around a year and a half
Reason 7 - 4 updates in around a year and a half
Reason 6 (inc. RE tech) - 6 updates in around a year and a half
Reason 5 - 1 update in around a year and a half
Reason 4 - 1 update in around 3 years

Reason 11 had the most updates of any version but until Reason 12 appeared it also seemed to have the most bugs.

[EnochLight]

Reason 5 - 1 update in around a year and a half
Reason 4 - 1 update in around 3 years

Both 4 and 5 had more than 1 release in their run - there was maintenance updates on both (Reason 4 even got Akai MPD32 support in one of the maintenance updates). Still, it was nothing compared to the new way of doing updates as of Reason 6 and beyond...

[rootwheel]

Both 4 and 5 had more than 1 release in their run - there was maintenance updates on both (Reason 4 even got Akai MPD32 support in one of the maintenance updates). Still, it was nothing compared to the new way of doing updates as of Reason 6 and beyond...

I could have sworn from memory that there was only Reason 4.0 and Reason 4.0.1 and Reason 5.0 and its Reason 5.0.1 update...

But yes those days are long gone. Whether it's due to a new-fangled development methodology or just because this is the way software is now developed in the modern world I'm unsure, but I certainly know which types of release I prefer

[EnochLight]

Both 4 and 5 had more than 1 release in their run - there was maintenance updates on both (Reason 4 even got Akai MPD32 support in one of the maintenance updates). Still, it was nothing compared to the new way of doing updates as of Reason 6 and beyond...

I could have sworn from memory that there was only Reason 4.0 and Reason 4.0.1 and Reason 5.0 and its Reason 5.0.1 update...

Right, those were the maintenance updates I was referring to.

[orthodox]

Reason 12 - 4 updates so far (only been out 2 months)

Wow! I didn't notice that, honestly. I know only about 12.2 and 12.2.1.

[rootwheel]

Reason 12 - 4 updates so far (only been out 2 months)

Wow! I didn't notice that, honestly. I know only about 12.2 and 12.2.1.

Ah yes, the first two versions of v12 were maybe Reason+ only - the changelog is here: https://www.reasonstudios.com/en/reason ... ease-notes

[earwig83]

Did they ever explicitly promise an October release or did they just show you a roadmap?

While certainly a valid point, don't you think companies should have learned that consumers have had enough of that fake cyberpunk roadmap garbage?

[earwig83]

Then they should leave out the Soundpacks etc. and concentrate on the essential things...
Very bad start of the roadmap.

If you still didnt noticed it, the packs are mostly (or all) made by other sound designers and sound designing is NOT code writing, so do not expect a sound designer to write code.

still company dollars being wasted

[earwig83]

Obligatory...



plan.JPG

Don't worry honey, my plan is to wash the dishes. I didn't say i would do it, just that it is my plan.

[earwig83]

with agile, the dates are usually set (typically two-week sprints), it’s just what’s delivered on those dates is the moving target.

I would disagree,

If the goal is to have software that works as a higher level principle then allowing the date to slide in order to achieve the goal of working software is acceptable.

If the developers have set themselves a goal that wasn't achieved then releasing it would cause more problems than any delay ever could and what should then happen is to identify what causes the delay and rectify the issues was the goal to big was the timeframe to short.

I personally think that bug fixes should become a higher priority and releasing fixes would show improvements that matter yes the disclosed feature enhancements should continue but maybe the timeframe is off so the principle suggests that communication needs to address this, it's easier to communicate that features would be introduced every other month and fixes would be released every two weeks.

This is a fine opinion but then we should get a partial refund of 50% IMO

[earwig83]

that’s not how agile works.

Maybe you should spend more time looking into it from a software development perspective especially when it's linked to an investment fund

Not my words

A brief history of Agile software development
In the 1990s, software development faced a bit of a crisis. Referred to as ‘the application development crisis’ or ‘application delivery lag’, the industry realized that it couldn’t move fast enough to meet customer demands and requirements—the estimated time between a business need and actual application was about three years. See, traditional development models were based on a timeline approach, where development happened sequentially and the final product wasn’t revealed to customers until the very final step. This left little room for flexibility when it came to progress reviews and changes. So, by the time an actual application was finished, it was highly likely that requirements and systems of the project’s original objectives had changed.

With time, money, and efforts wasted, and even some projects cancelled halfway through, professional leaders of the software community thought it was time for a new, refreshed approach. Then in 2001, in a snowy, ski lodge in Utah, a group of industry practitioners gathered to discuss industry practices. Though the meeting was set up with a primary focus on the discussion of development cycles, some participants were already entertaining the idea of a new software development method. They all yearned to cement a process that legitimized what was being practised, and so, came the creation of the Agile Manifesto.


Me again,

This crap has been going on for years but now our beloved Reason has been dragged into the philosophy which might sound great until you realise that it's all about the hype and money not about the product or community.

None of what we the "community" have suggested has become a reality until it made financial sense to the investors who use marketing strategy to entice customers into handing over cold hard cash wanted it to.

we are not the target being enticed with the current strategy it's other invester who will see the increases in account sign ups and understand nothing about the product or industry and just believe that increased interest produces increased profits.

James the marketing guy has been on ReasonTalk on and off during this whole time this thread was created and has kept quite,

not one single post or response to questions being asked which completely goes against the manifesto,

fact is it's just another buzzword that the marketing/investment team want to hear being used no more no less and our conversation is pointless, hence why I decided to post music videos as it is more productive and inspiring until the powers that be stepped in to request I get on topic or get lost

It is so frustrating how correct this is.

[earwig83]

If you still didnt noticed it, the packs are mostly (or all) made by other sound designers and sound designing is NOT code writing, so do not expect a sound designer to write code.

Indeed Loque is correct. The sound packs are outsourced to companies like my own and it's all administrated internally by a completely different department. Leaving out the packs would do absolutely nothing to speed up development of the core app. We'd simply end up with the same delay and a content drought to boot!

but the money could be put to better resources so that doesn't actually excuse it, no?

[orthodox]

Indeed Loque is correct. The sound packs are outsourced to companies like my own and it's all administrated internally by a completely different department. Leaving out the packs would do absolutely nothing to speed up development of the core app. We'd simply end up with the same delay and a content drought to boot!

but the money could be put to better resources so that doesn't actually excuse it, no?

No. The money paid to sound pack creators is from selling those sound packs as a part of subscription. No packs, less subscribers, no money.
And that is RS's money after all, them to decide.

[Carpainter]

Software development is very similar to construction - building a house or road network etc. Both disciplines have a design, a master plan, a budget and a deadline. They both plot out a plan in the beginning and set how much it will cost - be it software or a sky scraper. Yet - you don't hear of construction projects that say, let us just amble along and we will decide as we go when you will get your lift shaft, or windows, or roof. And we will tell you later how much it will cost. No - they set out a clear plan and they try however they can to hit those targets.

Construction is still largely a meritocracy, but software development has been crippled by credentialism, especially in the corporate world. I left software development to get into a trade, and it was the best decision of my life.