christripledot

I just know I'm going to get flamed here, but here goes...

After paying full whack for Max 5, I was disappointed to find the interface so sluggish as to be almost unusable. Eventually I decided it 

Very few bug fixes later and the price has dropped significantly. Oh, and if you buy it now, you get a free upgrade to v6. Which sort of promises to deliver everything that v5 should have been. Nice.

I feel well and truly stung. The upgrade price for Max 5 users is a slap in the face, especially considering that we have to pay extra for the code generation goodies.

Oh, and curved patch cords? That doesn't fill me with much confidence that the canvas is going to be any faster at all.

Even if the performance goes through the roof, the upgrade path should still be significantly cheaper. c74, think of it as an apology to the disappointed customers you already have.

And if the canvas is still just as sluggish, then you ought to make it a free upgrade. Think of it as a compensation payment.

Sorry if I've offended anyone here, but I can't help but feel cheated.

After paying full whack for Max 5, I was disappointed to find the interface so sluggish as to be almost unusable. Eventually I decided it was unusable, so I reverted to Max 4.

Sorry if I've offended anyone here, but I can't help but feel cheated.


max-6s-price-hurts-really-miffed

I agree to a degree - that is I think 199 is a bit steap upgrade price, unless the Code generation thingy is included (given that I just recently dished out 200 for a Jitter upgrade)

But still really excited about the features, especially code generation

I agree to a degree - that is I think 199 is a bit steap upgrade price, unless the Code generation thingy is included  (given that I just recently dished out 200 for a Jitter upgrade)

Out of interest, what were you doing that made you deem 5 unusable?

Er, trying to patch at a reasonable speed. For the record, I'm not an idiot trying to drag a thousand objects around at a time, although it should be said that a G4 ought to be able to do just than and still maintain a decent framerate.

No, mostly what bugged me was that after half an hour of intense work Max would grind to a halt. I know Max keeps hold of all the symbols since it was opened, but Max 4 doesn't slow to a crawl. No, it just keeps on going. It's a major disruption to my workflow to have to quit a program and relaunch it every 20–30 mins just for it to perform adequately.

There were times when encapsulating ~20 objects and minimal patch cords would necessitate a tea break.

After a while, even my quad-core Windows box struggled to drag 40 objects around at a time.

There was a big thread about this a while ago that turned ugly. The way I see it, there were two users (not naming names) who spoke the truth ("Max 5 is broken"). Admittedly they didn't air their opinions in the politest fashion, but at least they were honest with their feedback. Everyone else shouted them down, defending the sh*tty performance with arguments like, "Oh, but it's got rounded corners!" or, "Maybe you should upgrade your computer". It seems to me like everybody's too cowardly to admit that they were suckered out of their money by Presentation Mode.

Nobody is ever going to make me believe that they didn't notice a HUGE drop in performance from 4 to 5. And not just in terms of the GUI - there was another thread which quite plainly demonstrated that DSP performance was slightly down, too. And the devs said, "But that can't be! We didn't change the code!" To which I say, "Maybe so, but you have clearly overlooked something, because my computers all say the same thing: Max 5 is slower than Max 4, in every way."

Juce got a lot of flak, and although it may not be the speediest of libraries, I don't think it's to blame. You only have to spend two minutes with Renoise to see the kind of speedy, responsive interface it's possible to build with Juce!

Without wishing to stir things up (much) more, it's quite obvious to me that there are a good many users who don't want to acknowledge that they should have saved their money. Nobody wants to admit to themselves that they just spent £300 on a downgrade, do they? Or maybe there are just plenty of folk who don't mind dropping a few thousand on a new bad boy Mac Pro for the sake of rounded corners?

There are two things that Max 5 has over Max 4 for me. They are (in decreasing order of importance):

2. The ability to switch [poly~]s without interrupting audio

Presentation Mode doesn't do it for me. Switching to and from it is just painfully slow. Give me "Hide on Lock" and some well-organised bpatchers any day.

Since [1] wasn't even made by c74, I don't consider [2] a good enough reason to a) drop a few hundred dollars, or b) cripple my productivity.

After a while, even my quad-core Windows box struggled to drag 40 objects around at a time. 

1. Toshiro's awesome [sa.function]
2. The ability to switch [poly~]s without interrupting audio

Wow, this is just disrespectful. Seriously.

Wow, this is just disrespectful.  Seriously.

whining about the upgrade price is nonsense of course.

but as someone who uses mainly G4 processors, too, i can understand

why he switched back to max4 - that is what i was doing as well.

but as someone who uses mainly G4 processors, too, i can understand
why he switched back to max4 - that is what i was doing as well.


Chris, I used Max 4 as well as Max 5. I've done a *lot* of patching in 5 and I'm actually about to distribute the applications I made in it. I can't believe that after an hour or so of patching that Max 'locks up' or whatever. I've done much more than that on huge patches in 5 and never had any serious issues.

I agree it does seem slightly slower, but it's a much better environment in my opinion. Easier to use and nicer to look at (cointreauversial XD)

Chris, I used Max 4 as well as Max 5. I've done a *lot* of patching in 5 and I'm actually about to distribute the applications I made in it. I can't believe that after an hour or so of patching that Max 'locks up' or whatever. I've done much more than that on huge patches in 5 and never had any serious issues. 

I agree it does seem slightly slower, but it's a much better environment in my opinion. Easier to use and nicer to look at (cointreauversial XD)


We only need twohundred people to donate the minimum of two dollars so that christripledot can get the upgrade for free :)

Send your donation to 1682 28 611452 1602814729

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RadnGqPjdBY

"After paying full whack for Max 5, I was disappointed to find the interface so sluggish as to be almost unusable. Eventually I decided it was unusable, so I reverted to Max 4."

Dude, What are you talking about? Max 5 works perfectly fine and hardly crashes. True, it took a while to switch between max 4 to max 5 but it was well worth it. Very stable, more powerful, way better user interface and looks much better then max 4.

I welcome Max 6. Looking forward to the new features. I think its the way to the future for Max.

Some people just need to complain a lot. BTW I saw you posted some Max 5 stuff so it is usable after all:

https://cycling74.com/forums/a-mundane-first-post-tr-808-snare-emulation

Dude, What are you talking about? Max 5 works perfectly fine and hardly crashes. True, it took a while to switch between max 4 to max 5 but it was well worth it. Very stable, more powerful, way better user interface and looks much better then max 4. 

https://cycling74.com/forums/a-mundane-first-post-tr-808-snare-emulation


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udqIBv41b_Y

i remember when David Z. wrote this in the 'What Max5 Is and Isn't' article, "Getting rid of our 'legacy of dependence' stretching back to the Mac OS circa 1987 takes some time, which is why you haven’t seen a new version of Max in a while. But you will soon..."

It's really all the explanation that's needed. If your 'workflow' is one that can't put patience and trust in the process than you shouldn't be frustrating yourself with Max in the first place: it's bad for your blood pressure. (I also think gen~ will speed things up DSP-wise faster than 4, and javascript improvements will make for easier and more efficient GUI design, among other things...) But maybe you should find something more suited for your system. Or come back when they release Max8. Some people can rely on a steady growth process, other people need full functionality over night. You do what you gotta do.

'defending the sh*tty performance with arguments like, "Oh, but it's got rounded corners!"'

....but, Max6 has even more rounded corners! :D (I just wanted to be the first to use that as a defense for anything, i've never actually heard anyone use that as a defense. if i might further ask: what were you smoking? and can i have some?)

In all honesty it is about time you updated your computer and OS - seriously . . .

You are basically 3 or 4 processors and OS's too old and that is probably a main source of your problem imho . . .

Also factors such as amount of memory, bus speed, graphics processing etc have to be taken into account . . .

Do yourself a favour and 'get with the times' because C74 should be focussing on current/future OS's and hardware, not bothering with deprecated systems - hopefully Max6 won't run on 32bit / PPC platforms; I certainly would not want them wasting there time in that pursuit . . .

Moving from Max 4/G4 to Max5(6) on i7 is(will be) a wonderful experience - you won't look back . . .

Sorry if you feel offended but I believe you are 'cheating' yourself

Chris
In all honesty it is about time you updated your computer and OS - seriously . . .
You are basically 3 or 4 processors and OS's too old and that is probably a main source of your problem imho . . .
Also factors such as amount of memory, bus speed, graphics processing etc have to be taken into account . . .

Do yourself a favour and 'get with the times' because C74 should be focussing on current/future  OS's and hardware, not bothering with deprecated systems - hopefully Max6 won't run on 32bit / PPC platforms; I certainly would not want them wasting there time in that pursuit . . .
Moving from Max 4/G4 to Max5(6) on i7 is(will be) a wonderful experience - you won't look back . . .

For me, Max 5 's "canvas" is just a place to graphically program, and given my love of abstraction and encapsulation, I rarely get lots of objects on the screen, so the "slowness" of the Juce display relative to the old quickdraw screen is a non issue.

For those whose Max work involves Javascripting screen actions/animations, ok, you gave up something on Max5: probably to get much better with the improved Javascript engine in Max6.

But I wonder if working with the GL tools wouldn't be better for those users than beating their js horse. ok, I know pratically nothing of image synthesis, and am not really interested, so you can safely ignore my opinions.

please, just my ignorant take: ignore, don't flame.

For me, Max 5 's "canvas" is just a place to graphically program, and given my love of abstraction and encapsulation, I rarely get lots of  objects on the screen, so the "slowness" of the Juce display relative to the old quickdraw screen is a non issue.
For those whose Max work involves Javascripting screen actions/animations, ok, you gave up something on Max5: probably to get much better with the improved Javascript engine in Max6.
But I wonder if working with the GL tools wouldn't be better for those users than beating their js horse. ok, I know pratically nothing of image synthesis, and am not really interested, so you can safely ignore my opinions.

please, just my ignorant take: ignore, don't flame.
cfb aka j2k


I think what he's really getting at (and what I can agree with) is there were some performance issues that instead of being patched were glossed over with pseudo promises the whole version lifecycle and now we need to shell out half whack with no guarantee they will be fixed. It's just too bad it only pissed off a minority of users...then we would've gotten patched earlier or ever. Win some, lose some. They were never too major...but the canvas issues were definitely annoying.

"instead of being patched were glossed over with pseudo promises the whole version lifecycle and now we need to shell out half whack with no guarantee they will be fixed"

A Kindly meant hint, (since we are all prone to similar issues ): try to avoid

a) run on sentences, lacking necessary punctuation.

b) anger filled expressions that pre-judge the issue being disscussed: i.e.: "with psuedo promises" : I was present the entire time here on the forums, and saw no "promises", much less "psuedo promises". I saw acknowlegement of your and other's concern, and any "promise" was to make *efforts, where possible*: e.g: WHERE IT WAS NOT DUE TO JUCE, AND REQUIRING A COMPLETE REWRITE... of course, you and others might have read some sort of promise in this. I (and others) did not see any.

c)Finally: try and make *some* sense. e.g: "the whole version lifecycle and now we need to shell out half whack with no guarantee they will be fixed"...?....

I can puzzle out a meaning here, but you are not communicating well.

You are acting as if your particular need for improvement *must* be the main driving motivation of this small and hard working software company.

I find your ego ... disturbing. Have you ever run a for profit software company, specializing in a small fringe market?

I *know* that if it were simple to provide for your desires, they would be met. Period. You should try a little humility, I think it is a bit lacking in your (and others) angry outburst.

ok, now there will be flames.. whether or not they are appropriate.

"instead of being patched were glossed over with pseudo promises the whole version lifecycle and now we need to shell out half whack with no guarantee they will be fixed"
A Kindly meant hint, (since we are all prone to similar issues ): try to avoid
a) run on sentences, lacking necessary punctuation.
b) anger filled expressions that pre-judge the issue being disscussed: i.e.: "with psuedo promises" : I was present the entire time here on the forums, and saw no "promises", much less "psuedo promises". I saw acknowlegement of your and other's concern, and any "promise" was to make *efforts, where possible*: e.g: WHERE IT WAS NOT DUE TO JUCE, AND REQUIRING A COMPLETE REWRITE... of course, you and others might have read some sort of promise in this. I (and others) did not see any.
c)Finally: try and make *some* sense. e.g: "the whole version lifecycle and now we need to shell out half whack with no guarantee they will be fixed"...?....
I can puzzle out a meaning here, but you are not communicating well.

You are acting as if your particular need for improvement *must* be the main  driving motivation of this small and hard working software company.
I find your ego ... disturbing. Have you ever run a for profit software company, specializing in a small fringe market? 

an old and offended
Dr B.
ok, now there will be flames.. whether or not they are appropriate.


I posted a question a while ago, about when was c74 going to upgrade their javascript engine to something.. .err hmm contemporary :) . I am happy that it has been answered with Max 6's announcement (although I would prefer google's V8 but Mozilla's seems ok too).

All in all, I think it is too early to judge what it will be, or if it is worth it. Maybe we should wait for the first trial version to come up, evaluate and decide for ourselves if we will buy or not. Just hope that code generation (btw. does that == something a la Clang/LLVM?) will come with the trial for testing, as this is the reason (along with js) for the upgrade to me (and lot's of others too?). If it is crap or the difference is negligible, I 'll just skip to 7 or 8 (and learn to live without JS generators on Max).

P.S. With m4l, I find that i make more music and less posts :) life is good !

Hi,
Sorry to disappoint non-flame here ....
I posted a question a while ago, about when was c74 going to upgrade their javascript engine to something.. .err hmm contemporary :) . I am happy that it has been answered with Max 6's announcement (although I would prefer google's V8 but Mozilla's seems ok too). 

P.S. With m4l, I find that i make more music and less posts :) life is good !


I knew this was a touchy subject but I hadn't anticipated quite such widespread upset. Firstly, to anyone who feels personally offended here, please accept a very sincere apology from me. I'm sorry. I don't dislike you, and I mean you no disrespect.

I should probably have kept my thoughts to myself, but my fingers were enraged.

Heart on my sleeve here, I feel that Max 5 was a bit of a lame duck... for my purposes. I was lucky that my license extended retrospectively to version 4; it has saved me performance heartaches.

@Danny, I tend to post Max 5 patches because it's all people use these days. But I don't use it for serious stuff, for reasons I've already gone on about.

@Macciza, I'm using a variety of machines from G4 to i7 (with an i5, a core 2 duo, and a phenom in between). I'm sorry I dragged up the performance issue, and I acknowledge that I'm not qualified to comment on the reasons why Max 5 seems to be sluggish. But in my personal real-world experience, something about Max 5 feels slow and, dare I say it, a bit buggy/broken. My G4s handle lots of other software GUIs with aplomb, but the Max 5 canvas gives it trouble. My core 2 duo and my phenom also struggle with it. Yes, these processors are a little old, but they're no slowcoaches when it comes to Photoshop and Illustrator, and both of these programs have much more GUI work to do.

I've said my piece, and I just wanted to drop by and reiterate that I don't want to rock the boat. Just to have a little tantrum.

Let me focus my complaint on just one thing, that I think if pretty damn reasonable: I think it's harsh to charge anyone, let alone upgraders, an additional fee for 'code generation'. So far this has been the single biggest feature in the press release. I don't think that's right. The rest of the grumbles are between me, my wallet, and my computers, but I want c74 to know that not everyone's happy with the pricing.

I keep looking at the debate you guys are having and remembering when I started using photoshop (at v2.5). Every time the new version came out, the complaints sounded like what I see above. "It's bloatware, it's slow it's horrible." but then I remember when the new macs came out and everyone cheered, "This will run photoshop lighting fast" The question was always, "will this speed up photoshop?" And we (at least I) would double my resolutions, filter some stuff and watch the task bar fly to the right as if it wanted to break the edge of the monitor, spill all over my desk and ruin my 100MB zip discs. I never complained. I started at eleven. I was happy to have a computer so I just screwed around within the confines of photoshops performance. At least it wasn't KPT Bryce. I remember leaving my computer to sit for 3 days and render bryce files. Sluggish never bothered me because the alternative is "don't do that thing you wanted to do"

I keep looking at the debate you guys are having and remembering when I started using photoshop (at v2.5).  Every time the new version came out, the complaints sounded like what I see above.  "It's bloatware, it's slow it's horrible."  but then I remember when the new macs came out and everyone cheered, "This will run photoshop lighting fast"  The question was always, "will this speed up photoshop?"  And we (at least I) would double my resolutions, filter some stuff and watch the task bar fly to the right as if it wanted to break the edge of the monitor, spill all over my desk and ruin my 100MB zip discs.  I never complained.  I started at eleven.  I was happy to have a computer so I just screwed around within the confines of photoshops performance. At least it wasn't KPT Bryce. I remember leaving my computer to sit for 3 days and render bryce files.  Sluggish never bothered me because the alternative is  "don't do that thing you wanted to do"


@AudioMatt: I agree...it all seems so much easier and fascinating after creating moog/tape pieces with hundreds of splices in it & compiling a 12 min digital synthesis piece for hours and hours (and days!) on a Vax11/750, and storing the result on several large reels of "storage tape" & etc., etc.

Heck my inner child is still P.O'ed about losing Opcode's StudioVision: now that was a stable beast, ;-).

And MSP and Live and DP and SuperCollider and Csound and

"you whippersnappers don't know how good you have it!" :)

@AudioMatt: I agree...it all seems so much easier and fascinating after creating moog/tape pieces with hundreds of splices in it & compiling a 12 min digital synthesis piece for hours and hours (and days!) on a Vax11/750, and storing the result on several large reels of "storage tape" & etc., etc.
Heck my inner child is still P.O'ed about losing Opcode's StudioVision: now that was a stable beast, ;-).

And MSP and Live and DP and SuperCollider and Csound and
"you whippersnappers don't know how good you have it!" :)

I've stayed away from this debate for a few reasons:

- I've only been running Max for the last 2.5 years,

on my battered old 1.7GHz Athlon dual core (Vista/Max5.1.8);

- I don't do much processor-hogging stuff

But your remarks (and christripledot's last) prompted some esoteric thoughts, which I felt compelled to add.

If the added resource requirements result from improved functionality (ie audio engine, media streaming stuff) then I'm happy to invest. If an application gives me an 'improved' workflow (ie, changed/different) plus some graphical fripperies, then I'm usually not interested. But then, I don't make huge demands of my software. I skipped quite a few updates of Live and Reason, cos I saw through their updates as just keeping their coffers full. I buy new stuff when it does what I need it to do. But this thread goes way deeper than that.

@AudioMatt
I've stayed away from this debate for a few reasons:
- I've only been running Max for the last 2.5 years,
on my battered old 1.7GHz Athlon dual core (Vista/Max5.1.8);
- I don't do much processor-hogging stuff
- code generation? wha?

I'm not really arguing for or against Max 4, 5 or 6. Although it should be said that I was thinking of 4.6 to 5 when I wrote that post. What I'm saying is that to be pissed off about it doesn't seem pragmatic or justified to me. To me, this is really a case of don't like it/don't buy it. You can halve your expenditures by upgrading every other version.

I don't see how much deeper this goes. care to explain? I see the accusation that max 6 is making up for short comings (speed) in max 5. is that what you mean?

I'm not really arguing for or against Max 4, 5 or 6.  Although it should be said that I was thinking of 4.6 to 5 when I wrote that post.  What I'm saying is that to be pissed off about it doesn't seem pragmatic or justified to me.  To me, this is really a case of don't like it/don't buy it.  You can halve your expenditures by upgrading every other version.  

I don't see how much deeper this goes.  care to explain?  I see the accusation that max 6 is making up for short comings (speed) in max 5. is that what you mean?


I completely disagree with the statement that "Max5 is broken." Max5 brought me capabilities that let me do more than I could in Max4. Even though some things may have gotten moderately worse (e.g. graphics performance,) 

 As with most things in life, there are trade-offs, and you have to be willing to meet things half-way. People who remain focussed on one thing from the past (e.g. encapsulation speed, square vs. rounded corners,) and don't embrace what is newly available will not be happy with the changes.

• Presentation mode means that I can build larger patches while still keeping things manageable. I've been involved in some very large scale patches that were built in

• Alpha channels means that I can build more sophisticated U.I.s, without resorting to pre-cooked images and ubuttons.

• Multi-threading means that I could use those other CPU cores for my DSP.

• I'm not a Live user, but M4L is a really big deal for them. (and I'll admit I still miss Pluggo.)

All-in-all, I think that for every disgruntled customer like the original poster, there is a large group of people who look at Max5 as a genuine advance, and are happy with what it brings to the table. Every time I have to revisit something in Max4, I'm struck by how much better I think Max5 is. I'm sure Max6 will be better still. I've been a Max user since it was a project at IRCAM, through its homes at Intelligent Music, Opcode, and now Cycling 74, and for my uses, it continues to get better.

I completely disagree with the statement that "Max5 is broken." Max5 brought me capabilities that let me do more than I could in Max4. Even though some things may have gotten moderately worse (e.g. graphics performance,) for me Max5 is a large net improvement. As with most things in life, there are trade-offs, and you have to be willing to meet things half-way. People who remain focussed on one thing from the past (e.g. encapsulation speed, square vs. rounded corners,) and don't embrace what is newly available will not be happy with the changes. 

• Presentation mode means that I can build larger patches while still keeping things manageable. I've been involved in some very large scale patches that were built in  

• Multi-threading means that I could use those other CPU cores for my DSP. 

no discussion about speed or anything, I just liked your Photoshop comparison - very clearly stated, and it allows us to see the bigger picture (sic). Furthermore, Chris above says it way better than me, particularly regarding Presentation Mode. Without sounding too "cock-sucky", if Chris' summation doesn't end this thread then I don't know whose will.

ps 'taking threads off on a tangent': guilty! :¬P

"I knew this was a touchy subject but I hadn't anticipated quite such widespread upset....

....I should probably have kept my thoughts to myself, but my fingers were enraged."

Not at all. I think some of your complaints are unfounded which is why i made fun of the statement that anyone ever defended Max on the basis of round corners. I too did not mean for you to take it personally if you did.

But other than that, I think expressing that you're upset will at least let people know that there're other sides... as i've said before! this community can feel a bit too homogenous and secluded... it's threads like these that keep it interesting! 

After all, maybe there are others who feel like you do. I too wonder if they should charge extra for code-generation, but I don't REALLY know how kick-ass it's going to be(I just assume if the article says, "almost as fast as" externals written in C, and I'm writing some of my externals in C to speed things up, it might still be unreasonable for me to do something slower than that. how much code-generation, gen~ in particular, is going to help me out or force me to go back to writing externals is not something I can tell for sure right now...)... I'm still gonna pay for it if they do charge, because I trust them, that's what you do with small-niche-software companies you've benefited from for over a decade :) They haven't let me down at all, either, so even if they did, i'd still be back for more with the word, "sucka" written on my forehead if necessary...and i too miss pluggo, but try to be understanding about the whole M4L thing even though I think Live, while allowing some to be original, also tempts MOST(

"I knew this was a touchy subject but I hadn't anticipated quite such widespread upset....
....I should probably have kept my thoughts to myself, but my fingers were enraged."

But other than that, I think expressing that you're upset will at least let people know that there're other sides...  as i've said before! this community can feel a bit too homogenous and secluded... it's threads like these that keep it interesting! 
After all, maybe there are others who feel like you do. I too wonder if they should charge extra for code-generation, but I don't REALLY know how kick-ass it's going to be(I just assume if the article says, "almost as fast as" externals written in C, and I'm writing some of my externals in C to speed things up, it might still be unreasonable for me to do something slower than that. how much code-generation, gen~ in particular, is going to help me out or force me to go back to writing externals is not something I can tell for sure right now...)... I'm still gonna pay for it if they do charge, because I trust them, that's what you do with small-niche-software companies you've benefited from for over a decade :) They haven't let me down at all, either, so even if they did, i'd still be back for more with the word, "sucka" written on my forehead if necessary...and i too miss pluggo, but try to be understanding about the whole M4L thing even though I think Live, while allowing some to be original, also tempts MOST(


Although a well-managed project usually doesn't need loads of objects floating around, there are situations when it is necessary.

For me, Max 5's canvas is a place to graphically program. If canvas performance decreases, so does the rate at which I can graphically program. I sometimes drag objects around because it helps me visualise the steps of an algorithm within a patch. This is not unlike adding a few carriage returns, or keeping your white space under control, when writing text-based code. I consider this to be an important part of the programming process - it helps me think, and work, faster. Max 5 slows me down here.

You are right to point out that software upgrades go hand-in-hand with hardware upgrades. I picked Photoshop as an example because I would think it has to work a lot harder than Max in order to keep its GUI updated. I understand that the jump from 4 to 5 entailed a GUI rewrite, and I agree that a performance hit is a price worth paying sometimes. But in this case I feel that Max 5 lags a good way behind contemporary software on equivalent machines.

You have a point. I, like you, sometimes resort to writing my own externals to get the job done. It would be unrealistic to expect this "code generation" feature to perform as well as C except under very select circumstances.

BTW, I wasn't offended in the slightest. The rounded corners thing was meant as a bitter joke anyway. And yes, of course you can have some.

So... what am I saying here? I think I'm talking myself round to the (personal) view that Max 6 won't be worth the cost of an upgrade. Not until I can justify buying new computers, anyway. Or at least, not until some of the remaining bugs have been ironed out.

A piece of software like Max, with infinite possible applications, is always going to be a nightmare to debug. Problems probably won't surface for months, perhaps years, of many users pushing Max to the edge. I sympathise with the developers here.

But spare some sympathy for the users who can't afford to pay "major upgrade" prices for features they won't use much (a lot of new Max stuff seems geared towards beginners). Some of us just want the existing shortcomings fixed before we're alienated.

@Charles:
Although a well-managed project usually doesn't need loads of objects floating around, there are situations when it is necessary.

@AudioMatt:
You are right to point out that software upgrades go hand-in-hand with hardware upgrades. I picked Photoshop as an example because I would think it has to work a lot harder than Max in order to keep its GUI updated. I understand that the jump from 4 to 5 entailed a GUI rewrite, and I agree that a performance hit is a price worth paying sometimes. But in this case I feel that Max 5 lags a good way behind contemporary software on equivalent machines.

@raja:
You have a point. I, like you, sometimes resort to writing my own externals to get the job done. It would be unrealistic to expect this "code generation" feature to perform as well as C except under very select circumstances.

But spare some sympathy for the users who can't afford to pay "major upgrade" prices for features they won't use much (a lot of new Max stuff seems geared towards beginners). Some of us just want the existing shortcomings fixed before we're alienated.


(a lot of new Max stuff seems geared towards beginners) - oddly I was thinking the opposite - with Code Gen~, mutltithreaded bpathcers and increased support for Javascript I thought it was more geared towards old school coders rather than newer people who are fans of plug and play style patching.

My thoughts on the price is that Max is a great product and it is clear these people are working very hard to make something that people enjoying patching in. Money is always an issue but of all the things I have to pay for in this life Max is not high on the complaints list.

(a lot of new Max stuff seems geared towards beginners) - oddly I was thinking the opposite - with Code Gen~, mutltithreaded bpathcers and increased support for Javascript I thought it was more geared towards old school coders rather than newer people who are fans of plug and play style patching.  

My thoughts on the price is that Max is a great product and it is clear these people are working very hard to make something that people enjoying patching in. Money is always an issue but of all the things I have to pay for in this life Max is not high on the complaints list.


Re: prioritising monetary complaints, you are right on the money. I'm tired and slightly embarrassed, but I am capable of seeing things in perspective: I'll buy it when it's worth it to me, and that's how purchasing works. Complaining about it wasn't high on my list when I started the topic; it was merely a reaction to something I read in a quiet 5 minutes at work. But now I'm here, defending my statement, and it's getting silly.

Code Generation is certainly not geared towards beginners, I'll grant you that. After all, it's charged separately. So the tech people can buy it. OK.

But the tech people have to buy Max 6 to make it work. And I don't think we're ready to pay for 6 when 5 needs to be fixed. Max 6's existence suggests to me that there will be no more development on 5. And that saddens me, because I don't feel like I've got my money's worth. And to add insult to injury, new customers get to pay less for a better product. Is this really such a foreign sentiment for people to empathise with?

I care not for curved patch cords, or Vizzle, or M4L objects. I hate Live, and don't really like the way Max has cuddled up to it, resulting in the demise of Pluggo. But that's another story. Allow me to reiterate:

I just wish that I didn't have to pay for new stuff, in order to receive no guarantee that the existing problems (grievances previously aired) have been fixed.

My skepticism that Max 5's problems will be addressed properly in v6 stems from the overwhelming cavalcade of flames that engulfed the last people who dared criticise it, and what I perceive as an attempt by c74 to widen their customer base (*cough* *Ableton* *cough*). In broadening Max's appeal, c74 make life hard for themselves - conceiving and selling new features reduces the time that could be spent making their last product right.

But far be it from me to tell them how to run their business. It's their business and they have a great product that I could not create myself. But - and this is not directed at anyone in particular - it's sad when a paying customer gets shouted down by his fellow customers for expressing concerns about their mutual product. Many on this forum pounce on critics unfairly, undermining what may have been valid complaints. Consequently, the devs see that the loyal have spoken, flag the OP as a troll, and the wheels continue to turn.

Now somebody's gonna accuse me of having a persecution complex.

I have avoided weighing in because I was taken aback by two main insinuations in your first post: that users who bought into max 5 were duped and that the developers at Cycling '74 were behind some conspiracy to sell you a "downgrade" as you put it. Though it sounds like perhaps you are starting to at least recognize the other side of things. I agree with your underlying issue, mainly that the performance of Max could use a boost. I also agree that dissent, in the form of users voicing complaints are important, but what I don't agree with you on is HOW a software company should deal with those complaints. As far as I'm concerned it's time wasted to bow to every complaint and ensure that bruised egos are mended before we can get on with business. Apple seems to do it in a particular way which is to say ignore everyone equally and address users concerns en masse if at all. I have been at the brunt of it, but frankly they are a company I trust most of the time so if my complaints are not addressed I sometimes try and investigate the other side of the story. Cycling is no where near this level of high handedness (nor should they be). But if users are petitioning their money back en masse over something which can be fixed with an update or two or instigating a riot over something they "assumed" they were promised or feel they are entitled to I feel no sympathy over them being shouted down. And let's be clear, we are talking about consumer grade software. Your civil rights are not in jeopardy. A little perspective would be nice.

I have avoided weighing in because I was taken aback by two main insinuations in your first post: that users who bought into max 5 were duped and that the developers at Cycling '74 were behind some conspiracy to sell you a "downgrade" as you put it.  Though it sounds like perhaps you are starting to at least recognize the other side of things.  I agree with your underlying issue, mainly that the performance of Max could use a boost.  I also agree that dissent, in the form of users voicing complaints are important, but what I don't agree with you on is HOW a software company should deal with those complaints.  As far as I'm concerned it's time wasted to bow to every complaint and ensure that bruised egos are mended before we can get on with business.  Apple seems to do it in a particular way which is to say ignore everyone equally and address users concerns en masse if at all.  I have been at the brunt of it, but frankly they are a company I trust most of the time so if my complaints are not addressed I sometimes try and investigate the other side of the story.  Cycling is no where near this level of high handedness (nor should they be).  But if users are petitioning their money back en masse over something which can be fixed with an update or two or instigating a riot over something they "assumed" they were promised or feel they are entitled to I feel no sympathy over them being shouted down.  And let's be clear, we are talking about consumer grade software.  Your civil rights are not in jeopardy.  A little perspective would be nice.


I would hardly call it a conspiracy. I call it good business sense. And by this I'm not accusing c74 of being cynical money-grabbers. I hold them in very high regard. But "Fix it for free, or sell them a replacement?" is a no-brainer in this world.

You're right in that I assumed things would be made better. This was naive of me, and I suppose I don't deserve sympathy for that. Perhaps more users should have shouted louder, more constructively, and sooner, and 5 would have been OK.

But I still think the upgrade pricing policy is a joke, and the less vocal users are about it, the more we'll get rinsed in the future. OK, the "duping" thing may have caused some offence all-round, but I was just running my mouth. The point is that if you bought Max 5 new, you got a bum deal compared to those who upgraded, and now you're getting an even worse deal compared to new users. How does this not smell like disappointment, and valid disappointment, at that?

As for perspective, I'm hardly shouting it from the rooftops or setting myself on fire. I'm just complaining in the bloody Max forum, is all. Sorry, I'll take it to the MOTU forums.

"You can't win. If you shout us down Max will become more costly than you can possibly imagine."

I'm sorry to hear your frustration, and appreciate your willingness to express your opinions here. I also remember that in the initial versions of Max 5 there were many cases where the interface would draw slowly. Since then, we've done our best to improve patching responsiveness wherever we could, through researching real-world examples. The latest versions of Max 5 are much more efficient in terms of the user interface, and I encourage you to give it a try if you haven't already. If there are specific cases where UI responsiveness is slowing you down, please take a moment to provide us with a bug report and example patch so that we might reproduce it and discover what mechanism is slowing things down for you.

On the Mac OS side, Max 6 will be a Cocoa native application, and there will be a number of patching improvements that will speed up and simplify your patching experience.

I'd like to share something about our process in developing Max 6, in response to several concerns raised in this thread. For the first time in our history as a company, we devoted a great deal of time researching how both new and experienced users worked with Max. We looked intensively at how people patch, what their habits are, and what is slowing them down or keeping them from being creative. We found areas all over the software where we could improve this experience, and used this data to inform our development choices. I can't overstate how obsessed we are with making Max better. I'm hoping you can give us a little time to present those improvements to everyone, and withold any judgements of this upcoming upgrade until we've been able to fully represent it.

Hi christripledot,
I'm sorry to hear your frustration, and appreciate your willingness to express your opinions here.  I also remember that in the initial versions of Max 5 there were many cases where the interface would draw slowly.  Since then, we've done our best to improve patching responsiveness wherever we could, through researching real-world examples.  The latest versions of Max 5 are much more efficient in terms of the user interface, and I encourage you to give it a try if you haven't already.  If there are specific cases where UI responsiveness is slowing you down, please take a moment to provide us with a bug report and example patch so that we might reproduce it and discover what mechanism is slowing things down for you. 

I'd like to share something about our process in developing Max 6, in response to several concerns raised in this thread.  For the first time in our history as a company, we devoted a great deal of time researching how both new and experienced users worked with Max.  We looked intensively at how people patch, what their habits are, and what is slowing them down or keeping them from being creative.  We found areas all over the software where we could improve this experience, and used this data to inform our development choices. I can't overstate how obsessed we are with making Max better.  I'm hoping you can give us a little time to present those improvements to everyone, and withold any judgements of this upcoming upgrade until we've been able to fully represent it.


When you upgraded to version 5 (before testing) though knowing the limits of your cpu, I don´t see how to blame anybody but yourself. Or tell me the piece of complex software which reduced hardware requirements by its latest generation.

Its always an unlucky position of having bought before a price drop. It happens, but life goes on.

^And I thought I was the only bot around here!

________________________________
*Never fear, Noob4Life was never here!*


Thank you for taking the time to respond to a thread that has already gone in circles, Andrew. I never doubted for a moment the time and effort you guys put in to Max.

I haven't tried Max 5 since v5.0.3 I think, so I will definitely download the latest build and see if that improves things, but I've spoiled myself with the responsiveness of v4 so I expect I'll stick with that for a bit.

I'm very glad to hear that Max 6 will be Cocoa - I don't doubt this will speed things up dramatically. I bet you guys regret writing all that Juce code now ;)

Re: buying before a price drop: Yes, it's that old chestnut.

Re: higher version number = better performance = Renoise. Continuously being optimised for all platforms (including PPC) and the price keeps you in the upgrade loop for quite some time. I don't earn much; I like this policy.

Re: the other thing: I didn't actually upgrade to 5, I bought it outright. I tested it as best as I could within the 30 days, but you don't really get a chance to do much complicated patching in that time if:

a) You've never used Max (or anything like it) before

c) You have a girlfriend you want to keep

Only after getting a bit deeper did I start to think "something's not right". I tried Max 4 after I realised my license extended to it, and couldn't believe the difference.

@xh90
Re: buying before a price drop: Yes, it's that old chestnut.

a) You've never used Max (or anything like it) before
b) You work 50 hours a week
c) You have a girlfriend you want to keep

i have been desperately trying to ignore and avoid getting drawn into all this teenage angst bullshit surrounding the max6 anouncement on various threads. but christripledot, this last post of yours brings me kicking and screaming to the table. whilst i disagree with you from post outset regarding finances (i am not even going to comment here as i could take pages to do so), i have basically felt perfectly warm and gentle towards you and your right to bring up some points of negativity as you have, and also feel you have been unfirly shouted down a little by some folk. typical that it is andrew benson who gives you the warmest and most constructive response.

AND THEN: you admit that your max5 knowledge is based on... Max 5.0.3 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i mean for fucks sake christripledot?!?! you have made a COMPLETE fool of yourself! you idiot!

the current Max5.1.8 is a DIFFERENT programme to max 5.0.3. i cannot BELIEVE you have been basing this thread on knowledge of Max5.0.3 !!! that is actually insulting!

comparing 5.0.3 and 5.1.8 is like comparing 4.0 with 4.6 ! cycling could so easilly have called some of the 4.x updates max5, 6 &7 ! certainly since 5.1.x max has SO many improvements, a great deal of which max-users can be hugely indebted to the maxforlive project for.

i am actually in shock. i do not know what else to write you. oh i know, i could tell you this: i have run massive audio/OSC (seriously massive) max patches using 5.1.4 (or maybe 5.1.3, i cannot remember), on a 1GHz G4 Powerbook PPC with 768 MB ram in hugely mission critical live situations as high profile paid work for other people --- ZERO issues. performed perfectly. maybe you are just shit at programming? maybe i could give you some lessons?

p.s. - i am NOT a cycling74 apologist or fanboy; but anyone who knows anything about max (and csound and supercollider and pd and all the rest) knows from reading mr zicarelli's article that max6 will represent a revolution not just for max, but for creativity in audio and video with a computer period.

Max 6's price hurts. Really miffed.