My intentions, words, and meanings are crystal clear -- I feel props, their users, and their RE devs are better served with a shift on their updating strategy.
I'm not sure how I can say this consistently, even with my revised signature stating the same, and you guys fail to comprehend (or intentionally obscure) my crystal clear on-point stance.
Where is this coming from, seriously you guys need to read in context and quit cherry picking then going on a tirade of false accusations. I said they should be a choice instead of hand-fed upgrades as we all have different needs.People don't need Europa/Grain - I do. As soon as I got exposed to their powers, I really do. Sure, I can stack a gazillion subtractors to get a similar (but not comparable) result, or I can just add a Grain or Europa. You're not an authority on this matter, stop pretending you're talking on "people's" behalf and just spin it like it really is, then the "people" can stop search your threads for words like "people" and "users" and replace them with "me".
Prior quote to this same accusation:
"Enoch, I was disputing Edgrips' goofy notion that Reason had to have cutting-edge hand-fed devices for the sake of staying current and relevant to appeal to new users -- which is an absolutely absurd notion."
Which simply means "Relevant" or "Current" can be done if you really wanted to (using the subtractor simply as an example), its subjective, multiple styles for multiple needs - nothing more to read into it. Find that quote and read it in context.
However, maybe this piano guy needs a better piano instead of a grain engine. Maybe that orchestral guy wants and updated Orkester instead of Europa. Or maybe that synth guy wants Europa? Shouldn't those all be choices? Isn' that what the Rack Extension tech is for? By forcing a particular instrument as the upgrade, you exclude a large portion of potential buyers.
Negative? Not at all. I'm never negative about Reason nor its users, overwhelmingly state I love Reason and am passionate about it. However I also have no fears to state what is clearly a disconnect between Propellerhead and their users, nor have any fears stating any shortcomings. If someone feels Propellerheads is awesome about listening and participating with the community, awesome about timely adding of features, awesome about past decisions like their wealth of knowledge forum being shut down, etc, great! I find its best for us all to state how we feel, so the end results in a great product continuing to exist and thrive.I'm not saying you're doing something wrong here, but it seems that there's no "heated" debate without Psuper present being overly negative. I'd like to see that change, so people like me can chime in without being accused of being on someone's payroll and make these discussions pleasant to read for other users than you.
You confuse passionate criticism and creative suggestions with negativity. And you certainly confuse me with someone thinking you're on a payroll -- I never said nor implied anything of the sort.
And let me think about the article thing, it may be worth doing so we can clear things up and get some creative conversation going. But quite honestly, that link in my signature, the tldr of any potential article.