How about we make a helpful DAW / Host comparisons chart / forum post

Some people are genuinely interested in comparisons of Hosts / DAWs etc. Maybe once NS2 has been released, we could start a thread where we try to give people a general idea of what app has what features. Along with a general run down or description of what each app does best.

Comparisons are fair enough and are obviously important for some people to make buying opinions (not all can or want to buy all apps like many of us do lol).

Let’s forget Vs and compare in meaningful ways that may help some make decisions. Yes, we can’t really let someone know what they only will from actual use, but we can help people have a ballpark from where to start.

What do you think? Surely we can do this without getting into ‘my DAWs better than your DAW’ silliness.

I would like to bet most of us here use more than one DAW regularly on iOS?

«1

Comments

  • You mean something like a big graph with features going down the side and DAWs across the top, checkmarks for features in each? And maybe some type of rating for stability, like how Consumers Reports rates Auto models with reliability??? It might be interesting to see compared to lots of personal preferences because they like to do this or that with their DAWs. I think a nice impartial list of features would be a nice benchmark.

  • @NoiseHorse said:
    You mean something like a big graph with features going down the side and DAWs across the top, checkmarks for features in each? And maybe some type of rating for stability, like how Consumers Reports rates Auto models with reliability??? It might be interesting to see compared to lots of personal preferences because they like to do this or that with their DAWs. I think a nice impartial list of features would be a nice benchmark.

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

  • Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

  • @NoiseHorse said:

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

    Yes the organisation of the information would need to have really good organisation upfront to cater for such evolving entities. Maybe good use of colour too.

    I will try to think up some basic header groupings at some point and try to start something. It would take some time to get it to the point where it would be useful.

    Which DAWs / hosts would you include?

  • edited December 6

    Wonderful idea. This would have been very helpful to me a year or so ago. Sometimes it still would, it would save alot of typing for folks as they could just point to the thread. Good one @Fruitbat1919 .

  • @NoiseHorse said:

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

    @Fruitbat1919 said:
    Yes the organisation of the information would need to have really good organisation upfront to cater for such evolving entities. Maybe good use of colour too.

    I will try to think up some basic header groupings at some point and try to start something. It would take some time to get it to the point where it would be useful.

    Which DAWs / hosts would you include?

    I’ve excluded DAWs that don’t support AUv3 (e.g. MultiTrack DAW) or have no audio tracks or cells (e.g. sequencism).

    Some on the following list might be eliminated if there’s not a large enough user base to warrant their inclusion.
    Cubasis, Auria, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, Music Studio, StageLight, FL Studio Mobile, NS2, Meteor, MultitrackStudio, Orsilus

    Non-Track/Non-Cell can be combined/used with traditional DAWs
    Audiobus 3, AUM, apeMatrix

    Groovebox apps
    Gadget, BeatHawk, GrooveRider, Caustic, Launchpad, etc.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @NoiseHorse said:

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

    @Fruitbat1919 said:
    Yes the organisation of the information would need to have really good organisation upfront to cater for such evolving entities. Maybe good use of colour too.

    I will try to think up some basic header groupings at some point and try to start something. It would take some time to get it to the point where it would be useful.

    Which DAWs / hosts would you include?

    I’ve excluded DAWs that don’t support AUv3 (e.g. MultiTrack DAW) or have no audio tracks or cells (e.g. sequencism).

    Some on the following list might be eliminated if there’s not a large enough user base to warrant their inclusion.
    Cubasis, Auria, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, Music Studio, StageLight, FL Studio Mobile, NS2, Meteor, MultitrackStudio, Orsilus

    Non-Track/Non-Cell can be combined/used with traditional DAWs
    Audiobus 3, AUM, apeMatrix

    Groovebox apps
    Gadget, BeatHawk, GrooveRider, Caustic, Launchpad, etc.

    Maybe it would be prudent to start with a smaller group then.

    How about Cubasis, Auria Pro, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, StageLight, NS2 and MultitrackStudio to start off?

  • I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

  • @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

  • @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @NoiseHorse said:

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

    @Fruitbat1919 said:
    Yes the organisation of the information would need to have really good organisation upfront to cater for such evolving entities. Maybe good use of colour too.

    I will try to think up some basic header groupings at some point and try to start something. It would take some time to get it to the point where it would be useful.

    Which DAWs / hosts would you include?

    I’ve excluded DAWs that don’t support AUv3 (e.g. MultiTrack DAW) or have no audio tracks or cells (e.g. sequencism).

    Some on the following list might be eliminated if there’s not a large enough user base to warrant their inclusion.
    Cubasis, Auria, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, Music Studio, StageLight, FL Studio Mobile, NS2, Meteor, MultitrackStudio, Orsilus

    Non-Track/Non-Cell can be combined/used with traditional DAWs
    Audiobus 3, AUM, apeMatrix

    Groovebox apps
    Gadget, BeatHawk, GrooveRider, Caustic, Launchpad, etc.

    Maybe it would be prudent to start with a smaller group then.

    How about Cubasis, Auria Pro, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, StageLight, NS2 and MultitrackStudio to start off?

    I would include Meteor as 4Pockets, the developer has been very active in developing AUv3 effects recently.

  • @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @NoiseHorse said:

    Yeah you’ve got it.

    I know it would be a continual work in progress, but I honestly think it could be quite useful for people starting off. When I started on iOS four years back, I found it a minefield. Buying them all is not really a good option for someone starting completely from scratch.

    I think if a reasonably complete list of features was made, it would be easy to check new boxes for a DAW once it got new features. I think it could be a long list, there’s lots of diverse features, especially if you list specific effects available or routing options, etc. But still certainly the most efficient way to match up all DAWs on one page(that I can think of). We’d need a pretty loose definition of DAW so we didn’t leave anybody out....

    @Fruitbat1919 said:
    Yes the organisation of the information would need to have really good organisation upfront to cater for such evolving entities. Maybe good use of colour too.

    I will try to think up some basic header groupings at some point and try to start something. It would take some time to get it to the point where it would be useful.

    Which DAWs / hosts would you include?

    I’ve excluded DAWs that don’t support AUv3 (e.g. MultiTrack DAW) or have no audio tracks or cells (e.g. sequencism).

    Some on the following list might be eliminated if there’s not a large enough user base to warrant their inclusion.
    Cubasis, Auria, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, Music Studio, StageLight, FL Studio Mobile, NS2, Meteor, MultitrackStudio, Orsilus

    Non-Track/Non-Cell can be combined/used with traditional DAWs
    Audiobus 3, AUM, apeMatrix

    Groovebox apps
    Gadget, BeatHawk, GrooveRider, Caustic, Launchpad, etc.

    Maybe it would be prudent to start with a smaller group then.

    How about Cubasis, Auria Pro, Beatmaker 3, iMPC Pro 2, GarageBand, StageLight, NS2 and MultitrackStudio to start off?

    I would include Meteor as 4Pockets, the developer has been very active in developing AUv3 effects recently.

    Will definitely add more as we get started.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

    Yes that’s a fair point.

    I think I will start getting some basic feature headers up together. Post them here in a few days and get others to help flesh them out first.

    After that we can all decide on the layout and formats used that will best make it easy to add information as we go along.

    After we have the basics up and running, we could discuss expanding with some of your useful suggestions :)

  • @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

    Yes that’s a fair point.

    I think I will start getting some basic feature headers up together. Post them here in a few days and get others to help flesh them out first.

    After that we can all decide on the layout and formats used that will best make it easy to add information as we go along.

    After we have the basics up and running, we could discuss expanding with some of your useful suggestions :)

    Whatever is eventually decided upon will only be as useful as the willingness of people to provide accurate, relevant, and updated information on a consistent basis. Using markdown could be another alternative to structuring the information.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

    Yes that’s a fair point.

    I think I will start getting some basic feature headers up together. Post them here in a few days and get others to help flesh them out first.

    After that we can all decide on the layout and formats used that will best make it easy to add information as we go along.

    After we have the basics up and running, we could discuss expanding with some of your useful suggestions :)

    Whatever is eventually decided upon will only be as useful as the willingness of people to provide accurate, relevant, and updated information on a consistent basis. Using markdown could be another alternative to structuring the information.

    What’s markdown?

  • edited December 6

    In addition to all of the functional information of DAW there are issues such as IAP versus built-in functionality which comes with the app.

    The advantage of a markdown approach is that it’d be simple text which could also have links to create a webpage like ability to navigate the information. You could have an outline of features and when you press the link for the feature there could be links for:

    1. Description of the feature
    2. Video of the feature
    3. List of Apps with the feature
  • @InfoCheck said:
    In addition to all of the functional information of DAW there are issues such as IAP versus built-in functionality which comes with the app.

    The advantage of a markdown approach is that it’d be simple text which could also have links to create a webpage like ability to navigate the information. You could have an outline of features and when you press the link for the feature there could be links for:

    1. Description of the feature
    2. Video of the feature
    3. List of Apps with the feature

    Yes we need to discuss the implementation more.

    As for checks and balances, I was thinking:

    We get a selection of people who want to be involved and hold the database information offline.
    Before the online information is updated, each of these people are sent the update and can check the new information is correct / relevant before the online is updated.
    A dating system so that people can see when the information has recently been updated.

  • edited December 6

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

    Yes that’s a fair point.

    I think I will start getting some basic feature headers up together. Post them here in a few days and get others to help flesh them out first.

    After that we can all decide on the layout and formats used that will best make it easy to add information as we go along.

    After we have the basics up and running, we could discuss expanding with some of your useful suggestions :)

    Whatever is eventually decided upon will only be as useful as the willingness of people to provide accurate, relevant, and updated information on a consistent basis. Using markdown could be another alternative to structuring the information.

    What’s markdown?

    Here’s a markdown tutorial that lists the basics. The Audiobus forum supports markdown. The numbered list in my previous post, this bold text and the link above were all created with markdown using text entry from the Safari browser.

    Here’s a screenshot of the above in the forum editor.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    I would propose including a detailed description of various workflows with links to videos demonstrating those workflows.

    There could also be links/videos/explanations of various standards like:
    IAA, AUv3, Link, MIDI, MPE, SF2, SFZ, EXS24, Audiobus support, bus, audiotrack, latency, banks, cells, compression, mixer, sync, stems, Ableton Live Set, . . .

    Perhaps some sort of Wiki structure where people can have the ability to dig into details as well as to have cross reference capabilities to look into the features of similar apps or find apps which have similar features?

    Yep the links sound a good idea for addition at some point. The Wiki structure is beyond me though.

    I’m sure creating a wiki or other more useful tools is not beyond the capabilities of some forum members. Developing this information could be a multi-stage process consisting of gathering the information provided by forum users and then sharing the information in useful ways like a wiki.

    Yes that’s a fair point.

    I think I will start getting some basic feature headers up together. Post them here in a few days and get others to help flesh them out first.

    After that we can all decide on the layout and formats used that will best make it easy to add information as we go along.

    After we have the basics up and running, we could discuss expanding with some of your useful suggestions :)

    Whatever is eventually decided upon will only be as useful as the willingness of people to provide accurate, relevant, and updated information on a consistent basis. Using markdown could be another alternative to structuring the information.

    What’s markdown?

    Here’s a markdown tutorial that lists the basics. The Audiobus forum supports markdown. The numbered list in my previous post, this bold text and the link above were all created with markdown using text entry from the Safari browser.

    Thanks. I will have a good look at this later (as long as NS2 doesn’t drop tonight lol).

  • Great idea @Fruitbat1919 In fact, if it were a book, I’d have bought it before spending 100s on apps I will never use. Knowing nuanced things about an app like Dev size, communication, track record, support plus info on app features, known bugs and workarounds, etc would be a great resource...

    Dare I say it could be an essential app for the would be AppMusician...

  • @WillieNegus said:
    Great idea @Fruitbat1919 In fact, if it were a book, I’d have bought it before spending 100s on apps I will never use. Knowing nuanced things about an app like Dev size, communication, track record, support plus info on app features, known bugs and workarounds, etc would be a great resource...

    Dare I say it could be an essential app for the would be AppMusician...

    And hopefully it might help some beginners get less grumpy than some of us iOS users have become lol

  • I think it’s probably best to discount some hosts from the process and just have a note at the beginning of the hosts we think are essential.

    I doubt many of us here wouldn’t recommend AudioBus, AUM and apeMatrix to most users, so I think brief descriptions and links for information for those three would be ok

  • edited December 6

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    In addition to all of the functional information of DAW there are issues such as IAP versus built-in functionality which comes with the app.

    The advantage of a markdown approach is that it’d be simple text which could also have links to create a webpage like ability to navigate the information. You could have an outline of features and when you press the link for the feature there could be links for:

    1. Description of the feature
    2. Video of the feature
    3. List of Apps with the feature

    Yes we need to discuss the implementation more.

    As for checks and balances, I was thinking:

    We get a selection of people who want to be involved and hold the database information offline.
    Before the online information is updated, each of these people are sent the update and can check the new information is correct / relevant before the online is updated.
    A dating system so that people can see when the information has recently been updated.

    This sounds very good. It’d also be nice to have contacts for various aspects of this project listed within the project so users and developers could provide them with updated information. Along with the update date, it’d be good to list things like app version number, plus a link to the app in the App Store so people can see what devices it runs on, iOS versions it supports, etc. Perhaps even a tutorial on how to find information in the App Store would be useful as well as a discussion of its limitations?

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    In addition to all of the functional information of DAW there are issues such as IAP versus built-in functionality which comes with the app.

    The advantage of a markdown approach is that it’d be simple text which could also have links to create a webpage like ability to navigate the information. You could have an outline of features and when you press the link for the feature there could be links for:

    1. Description of the feature
    2. Video of the feature
    3. List of Apps with the feature

    Yes we need to discuss the implementation more.

    As for checks and balances, I was thinking:

    We get a selection of people who want to be involved and hold the database information offline.
    Before the online information is updated, each of these people are sent the update and can check the new information is correct / relevant before the online is updated.
    A dating system so that people can see when the information has recently been updated.

    This sounds very good. It’d also be nice to have contacts for various aspects of this project listed within the project so users and developers could provide them with updated information. Along with the update date, it’d be good to list things like app version number, plus a link to the app in the App Store so people can see what devices it runs on, iOS versions it supports, etc. Perhaps even a tutorial on how to find information in the App Store would be useful as well as a discussion of its limitations?

    Yes, just added version number and iOS versions to my list lol

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @InfoCheck said:
    In addition to all of the functional information of DAW there are issues such as IAP versus built-in functionality which comes with the app.

    The advantage of a markdown approach is that it’d be simple text which could also have links to create a webpage like ability to navigate the information. You could have an outline of features and when you press the link for the feature there could be links for:

    1. Description of the feature
    2. Video of the feature
    3. List of Apps with the feature

    Yes we need to discuss the implementation more.

    As for checks and balances, I was thinking:

    We get a selection of people who want to be involved and hold the database information offline.
    Before the online information is updated, each of these people are sent the update and can check the new information is correct / relevant before the online is updated.
    A dating system so that people can see when the information has recently been updated.

    This sounds very good. It’d also be nice to have contacts for various aspects of this project listed within the project so users and developers could provide them with updated information. Along with the update date, it’d be good to list things like app version number, plus a link to the app in the App Store so people can see what devices it runs on, iOS versions it supports, etc. Perhaps even a tutorial on how to find information in the App Store would be useful as well as a discussion of its limitations?

    Having devs know who to contact regarding updates or clarification on information is a good point.

  • One possible easy way to structure it would be to have a master thread and the sub threads would be links in the main thread. The first post of each thread would contain the standard information and be updated. Users could make comments in the threads to provide information.

    This would be similar to the way a new app thread is created and the OP will list App Store links, videos, etc. as these new pieces of information become available.

  • @InfoCheck said:
    One possible easy way to structure it would be to have a master thread and the sub threads would be links in the main thread. The first post of each thread would contain the standard information and be updated. Users could make comments in the threads to provide information.

    This would be similar to the way a new app thread is created and the OP will list App Store links, videos, etc. as these new pieces of information become available.

    It’s an idea. Will have to think more on that one. Is there any negatives to this idea with regards to how threads are kept over time on the forum? Or any other positives or negatives?

  • The desktop DAW comparison chart by admiralbumblebee.com consumes a huge amount of that guy's time. It's a valuable resource, but you'd really need to have a reason to do that, and then maintain it.

  • @vitocorleone123 said:
    The desktop DAW comparison chart by admiralbumblebee.com consumes a huge amount of that guy's time. It's a valuable resource, but you'd really need to have a reason to do that, and then maintain it.

    Yes, it may come to pass that be bitten more off than I can chew, that why I’m gauging interest in the idea and sharing the load.

    It’s worth throwing ideas out there though and see if it’s a possible thing some of us would like to do.

    Fair warning though and I appreciate your input :)

  • I did this idea once in a forum format to create a user manual for a VJ application. I took on the position of Editor and created a new (sticky) thread. In the first message, I explained that this thread will only contain this one permanent message. People would respond to this message with content, and I would format and add the content to the first message, deleting the original reply. This allowed me to control the format to keep things easy to find. It also allowed any forum member to contribute to the project, leaving me to only lightly edit the content. As the project continued, the format of the first post became evident, and I started receiving content pre-formatted. This worked rather well.

    As for the formatting and editing of the content, I went with a numbered outline and filled in the major headings and subheadings. Where I needed content, I'd put "send us content!" To be honest, a wiki is designed exactly for this need - a group project. But if you want to keep it within a forum, this works pretty good. It spreads out the work, preventing burnout.

    I am a web developer and could provide resources if you guys rather go in a website direction. I'm mostly a lurker, but have been here since the beginning.

Sign In or Register to comment.