Raising the bar for the future of Auxy


#257

Oh - still, though it’s not a huge disrespect, responding to users is not their first priority, im sure


#258

Asking a question to clarify is not stating. I wasn’t sure.


#259

Sorry, it sounded as if you knew from direct communication it was already denied. Even though I clearly and explicitly stated I had received no response.


#260

Yes, I’m sure they responded to you without responding to you. That would make sense.


#261

This was under the assumption that they mentioned it in the producer’s chat and said they wouldn’t do it, going off of a conclusion according to your statement that they had “already denied it”.


#262

Not following up is different from being impolite


#263

@TheRealJFalc you seem to have overlooked this part


#264

I’ve had instances of them being rather dismissive in the past. Assuming I had malicious intentions while recommending something, as an example.

Example


#265

This assumption was before this statement, and since this was at least a month ago, before lenberg went rather silent on the forum, I had assumed there had been some form of contact. Considering the “drop the project” project had been released during this time.


#266

To be fair, people do repeatedly advise Auxy to do all sorts of different things all the time, and I see how that could get irritating. The repeatedly part.


#267

This was in a thread where he was asking for votes on what the project feed could be used for, and he said to post other recommendations in the comments. I simply did what I was instructed.

I wasn’t advising anything either. I was stating what I’d like to see in the feed.


#268

Auxy shouldn’t be expected to see every single thing users nag them for, though, should they?

It’s a bit selfish to get mad at them not giving you, one of thousands of users, attention for whatever you want.

‘Nagging’ implies repeated requests - so, yes, they should be engaging with recurring requests.

As mentioned, a quick acknowledgement is better for their reputation than behaving in a way that fosters the idea that they’re ignorant to the concerns of users.

They simply need to be better at this - or kill this masquerade that they’re actually listening once and for all.

‘Managing expectations’ is a thing.

 

their focus is more (and rightly so) on building the app [and addressing things in real life outside of development, potentially] rather than fishing through thousands of comments.

They need to find a way to do both. That’s the nature of running a business today.
If they can’t handle that, then they’ve misjudged the whole venture.

(Tbh, I’m not particularly impressed by the results of the last six months’ effort.

Afaik, L isn’t a dev, but certainly is the owner/manager with a background in marketing, which puts marketing squarely on his desk. If he’s not a dev, then I really don’t know what’s he’s been busy on for the past six months.)

 
I’m not intentionally goading them, but I’m aware that I’m getting close to the knuckle on some of my comments. It’ll be interesting to see how Auxy handles/reacts to that kind of criticism.


#269

Why are they owed fairness? We’re paying customers giving them insights into things that will stop their product becoming irrelevant to us.

They should definitely be more interested in hearing that kind of feedback.


#270

F… A… Q… ?


#271

Indeed. A simple FAQ’s page would help eliminate a lot of the repeated questions.

Or rather, laying out a roadmap with all important features in consideration would help as well. If they really were planning to release packs that people keep asking, I’m sure we’d stop asking for them. As I currently see it though, they don’t really show any intention of such things.

In addition, looking back over the post made me realize that a potential reason for the hostile response I received from Lenberg could be in part due to me suggesting they let the users decide a bit on upcoming features for the app. Which only cements the secrecy and silence they have as to the future Auxy holds. It’s their vision or no vision, which isn’t a very good attitude to have.


#272

This. It’s as simple as this. If it was free and we were complaining then I’d say we’re really just a bunch of self absorbed over indulgent… turd… burgers.

This applies to anything that costs money. I have a problem with my TV service and internet at my house. I’ve called the cable company multiple times, I’m met with apathy and no clear idea why there are problems.

Guess who is switching to a different provider?


#273

They just need live recording with Figure style keyboard and a live erase button, midi, etc. So what? It worked well once before it can work again for Auxy. Because I personally can’t be bothered anymore to painstakingly program melodies when I have half a dozen other apps where I can just shred them out live on the screen. But the problem is they made the sequencer such that even alternate time signatures would require a complete rewrite of the sequence according to past comments, that doesn’t bode well for EVER getting live recording unfortunately. Also, Lenberg implied to me a while back that he didn’t view live playing on a touchscreen as a viable option. To which I replied with a laundry list of iOS apps that have it successfully implemented. Never heard back after that. So I really don’t know what they can do besides build a FOURTH iteration of Auxy that is subscription from day one and has some of these features. Hopefully constructed in such a way that makes it way way easier to build upon over time. Cause I feel like a lot of these requests are met with responses to the effect of “well we can’t do that because of the way the engine works and it would be a big task, etc, etc”


#274

Auxy 5.x (version 2.0) - I’m in!


#275

That seems their go-to response for anything they don’t consider important, so they blame something else. That’s the impression I get :\


#276

Agreed—liveplay would be the best. I was thinking drum pads, too—as far as time signature goes, it occurred to me that a “snap” Option next to the “Soft” button could turn any unquantized notes quantized to any one signature of your choice. That, or perhaps live play doesn’t produce actual notes—it just overlays a graphic of the played pattern over the sequencer in the loop. This way, you still have to input melodies manually, but with the guidance of the “ghost” of what you just played.

This way sharing projects with liveplayed, unquantized notes via link wouldn’t crash the mobile phone.

That or every note is now interpreted by the app as on a 1/192 scale, so duples and triples alike fit in, and all liveplay automatically snaps to those specifics.

Probably how most apps with duple and triple time work anyways.