duh, hence the reference
Hi there,
Came here to write this. I notice Elektron has missed a couple of software deadlines. I also notice that you seem to be developing software in a closed-source, closed-testing fashion. With much humble respect, and as a software developer of many years - might I suggest these two things could be related?
Electron recently announced the decision to release Overbridge for free to its users - which is great. Along these lines, would you also consider opening up the codebase? Given that many musicians and/or developers these days wear both hats, and given that many have a vested-interest in seeing this software work, opening up the code may likely accelerate development and increase robustness and stability at no extra cost.
I further believe Electron is currently facing a (/its first?) large public-relations disaster, which may not have yet come to full force. Implementing, at the very least, an immediate open āalphaā or ābetaā for Overbridge in whatever current state its in would very likely mitigate this. Simply make clear āthis is Alpha software, not to be used in a production environment, many features may not work correctlyā, and at least if any features work, on some configuration of system, it will provide some breathing room for some of your customers. For the others, setting up a simple bug-reporting site, would provide Elektron developers with an army of eyes in all kinds of operating environments.
If the code was further open-sourced (ie, on GitHub), the benefits of this openness could reach much deeper, directly into working Pull-requests and code-fixes, or usefully-written issues (bug requests) supplied by adept users - myself potentially included.
At the very least, I believe it should be acknowledged that something may need to be done differently here. Software development is hard! And cross-platform, real-time digital audio is one of the absolutely very hardest things to do. Elektron may not presently believe they need any extra help, but with months passing since project release dates, and half-working feature-sets as a result, your users may beg to differ.
In any case, best of luck. I look forward to using Overbridge at some point in the future - if I havenāt given up and moved on. I donāt want to do that - I love Electron products, and they are terrifically unique in many ways, but I - like many others - simply have to get things done.
Kind regards,
TN
5 Likes
Not gonna happen. They recently advertised to hire software developers. Seems that someone at Elektron has basically decided that OB is the future for this companyā¦ a mistake, IMO.
1 Like
IMO the chances of Overbridge going open source are nil, and for good reason. Even setting aside the significant IP issues here, I think community contributions would be minimal ā not many developers are qualified to work on real-time streaming audio software.
That said, I fully support wider alpha/beta testing.
4 Likes
Regarding the latter issue - itās certainly possible, but thereās only one way to find out for sure, and itās at no great costā¦
As such - regarding the IP issue, my view is itās a moot point. Theyāve decided itās free already, so they lose nothing in sales. Further, if the āworstā happens, and someone else picks up their code, and implements it better than them (both things would have to happen), they can still dedicate themselves to supporting the better product, and without the overhead of having to develop It themselves. Do they care about their users or not? If they do, theyāll flourish - if they donāt, they wonāt. Those rules donāt change in any industry. Further, historically, open-sourcing pretty much anything has generally been a win-win in any industry thatās tried it.
If, as the other poster says, someone in Elektron is betting the future on closed-source software - I really donāt think that person at Elektron gets software at this point in time. However, hiring a handful of software developers wouldnāt appear to me to constitute a major change of direction for the company.
Overbridge did have a public Beta before it was ever realeasedā¦
So many forum folks jumped on it and then came a world of issues, complaints, people being upset, etcā¦
So much that I created a topic just to remind people that they are actual beta testers, and then I got laughed at by the folks this was obvious toā¦
There definitely wasnāt a general smooth happy, yay we get to preview and beta test and report bugsā¦
Many people readily jumped on the Beta but then would freak out that there were bugsā¦
2 Likes
This is special software that is only useful to those with compatible Elektron machines, and is advertised as a big selling point for the machines (unfortunately for both Elektron and us).
The only time it could be open sourced is if Elektron went out of business but Iād bet they wouldnāt do it even thenā¦
It would be great if they did though, as they clearly have bitten more than they can chewā¦
2 Likes
OB1 as I understood it. OB2 does not have a public beta that Iām aware of?
(Note that there is no canonical reference for the following, this is just an āopinionā, but its pretty much how things areā¦)
Pre-release software development typically has three cycles:
- Internal. Nothing works and everything is a mess. At this point, it cannot even be usefully determined what things will be included in the final release, or - crucially - exactly how they will be implemented or used. Itās not sensible to release at this stage, because problems here are architectural and any user finding something they likes that works might find it doesnāt work next week, nor ever again. Thatās kinda horrible.
- Public/Private alpha. Here, things may not work, but the product gives you a good idea of what it might actually do. At the very least, itās unlikely anything major will change in terms of feature set, other than currently broken things might start to work later on. Certainly its unlikely (though still possible), that things would be taken out. The essential architecture is there, there are just bugs that have not been worked through or features that have not been fully implemented, but there is a clear path to eventual implementation of every feature presented.
- Public beta. Some things may not work well, but mostly everything should work fine. Here are where (sometimes many) edge-case bugs may be found and eliminated. The expectation is that nothing will change architecturally, no features are disabled, and things should mostly function as intended and expected.
If Elektron called an Alpha a Beta (which sounds like what might have happened), thatās their own fault. It is not the fault of the public-testing process which is extremely valuable and IMO essential for cross-platform development of any kind, but doubly essential when hundreds of different things need to happen absolutely perfectly and in sub-millisecond time-frames. Further, the only way they could have a bunch of upset customers as the result of a pre-release (alpha or beta) is that no matter what they named or mis-named it, they didnāt communicate correctly to their customers what kind of experience to expect.
What Iām suggesting is they do an alpha release, and clearly state this is the case. Even if itās actually a ābetaā and mostly works at this stage, it will simply be regarded as a great Alpha - so thereās nothing to lose calling it an Alpha and advising their customers it may not work.
What appears to be the case, unfortunately, is that they are still in the āInternalā stage, and may even have been since OB1. That would suck. But the lack of even an Alpha to appease customers when their second deadline is effectively ānowā suggests this may be the case.
3 Likes
It was quite obvious but many seemed to ignore, jump in, and complain instead of happily reporting beta bugsā¦ You had to sign a form evenā¦
Iām not trying to be against this, Iām just letting you know what happened beforeā¦ 
1 Like
I remember that.
Elektron announced OB but kept saying it wasnāt ready, people begged and begged for them to go ahead and release it.
As soon as people got access to it, disastrous.
Like within weeks people were complaining how they couldāt use it in a live situation.
Lotās of people planning rigs that incorporated OB without even using it.
2 Likes
Still happening, especially with the DT crowd.
I think Elektron kind of painted themselves into a corner with Overbridge.
a lot of users never wanted it,
a lot of users wanted it but many of those who wanted it didnāt want it enough to pay for it,
the development and compatibility issues are here to stay and will require ongoing resources indefinitely,
the user support requirments will be much more than had they stuck to not getting involved with software at all,
as it stands today many users are not happy with Elektron precisely because of Overbridge,
even now that it is free of charge people are still unhappy,
because it is free of charge it is costing Elektron money and not directly generating any revenue,
it appears that unfortunately It is a very difficult and complex mess.
I really hope that they can get it sorted, but Iām inclined to think that problems will continue WRT Overbridge, I might be wrong though, hope so.
4 Likes
I totally agree. OB should be scrapped or put to the back of the āto-doā list and all the OS updates and Transfer App that are being held back should be released YESTERDAY.
But of course I am entitled.
partially agree,
there are a few more things why people arenĀ“t happy with elektron!
OB is just the top of ā¦
Yes there are other reasons such as infrequent OS updates, and no 2 way sample transfer, outstanding bugs on the hardware etc. But generally in the pre OB days these were dealt with much quicker, coincidence or maybe because they have more machines now, who knows?
Of course itās not a coincidence.
Every change in firmware should have a repercussions on OB.
And there is only one OB, while there are 7 OB-enabled machines.
And even more OS / DAWs pairs out there.
OverBridge was a bold move. Partly explains the āsimplificationā/focused aspect of the little boxes.
But itās not abandoned.
And I believe Elektron are smart people, learning from their woundsā¦
Letās just have faith they wonāt deceive. Cause they surely have high standards, even if they fail to reach the speed or perfection you might require from them.
3 Likes
OB doesnāt seem that old, so far itās been version 1.
Iāve tried it here and there, and sometimes it worked great, other times not so much.
When it did work well, I could definitely see the appeal for people who like to lay out tracks in a DAW.
I imagine once they get it dialed in, itāll be super tight just like any of their more polished products.
I donāt believe they will deceive and I agree they have high standards, the machines are mostly excellent and have always been, Iām personally not disappointed about Overbridge or the speed which it arrives because I am not the target market, not using a DAW 
I do however feel for those who are waiting for it.
1 Like
This is what I meant in my earlier post, the workload has increased exponentially.
Yes it was, I think it might have been better had it been contracted out to a software company though, for a number of reasons.
Indeed, I have to say though I prefer the caffeinated machines rather than the decaf
There is no way they could abandon it now, nor should they.
Absolutely, never had any doubts about that, the recent addition of staff to work on Overbridge is a pro-active move that will surely alleviate some of the burden.
2 Likes
Totally agreeing with yourself, @AlexCase ?
NOTICE:
All,
You are only allowed one account on Elektronauts.
If you wish to stir the pot, go for it, make your reasoned arguments, as long as it falls within the guidelines.
But you cannot do so because your main account has already been suspended for forum guidelines violations, and is / was already one more violation away from eternal suspension.
5 Likes