Stable version?

I’m sorry but I need to ask about when are we going to see a stable version. I appreciate staying current with copy protection schemes but I am concerned about how each version goes backwards. I offered this criticism before and it wasn’t well recieved. I find myself needing to bring it up again.

How is it we get stable versions for mobile devices and iPod conversion and then as future versions are released a/v synch issues and lockups and conversion issues are back?

I offered the last time that this seems to be symptomatic of too rapid of a release process. It also seems like the code that should be left alone, working code, is either dropped or changed. I do not understand that.

I support this software, use it, like it very much. I’m not going to any other software package. I’m just asking that we get a stable reliable version with the current features and THEN move on to adding new options, etc.

How many more options can they add? The program has pretty much everything one could want now.

Only other option I want is to copy audio only so I can make CD’s for my car from concert DVD’s. Shouldn’t be too hard I would think. BTW…great program.

HI ,
SORRY FOR WRITING IN HERE , BUT I HAVENT BEEN HERE FOR A WHILE , I CANT FIND WHERE TO MAKE A NEW post /THREAD , PLEASE HELP .

THANKS

On the forum index page, look on the left just above the orange bar (using the v1.0 style view). It’s near where the “Reply” button is as you view this page of posts.

[QUOTE=ZootAllure;1942709]Only other option I want is to copy audio only so I can make CD’s for my car from concert DVD’s. Shouldn’t be too hard I would think. BTW…great program.[/QUOTE]

check out this by signals

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f116/mp3-audio-files-dvds-using-dvdfab-platinum-214234/

edit//umm guess what i get page not found??? any way check out his signature just above my post

[quote=troy512;1942758]check out this by signals

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f116/mp3-audio-files-dvds-using-dvdfab-platinum-214234/

edit//umm guess what i get page not found??? any way check out his signature just above my post[/quote]The link is bad but the guide is still there. I retested the links in my sig last week and they were working then.

[QUOTE=signals;1942782]The link is bad but the guide is still there. I retested the links in my sig last week and they were working then.[/QUOTE]

sorry about the confussion. the link in your sig works.

but the link i posted does not work.:a i told rolling56 that i would stop complaining about the link problem but it just keeps showing up.:a

edit//sorry for going way off topic:o

There’s been talk about supporting external codecs for instance.

While I appreciate the forward thinking of Pathplayer, it seems to me before it as a variable was introduced the non Pathplayer version should have been nailed down tight. Working, stable, etc. with current protection schemes, features, etc. Yes I know the point of Pathplayer is for new protection schemes.

At this point all I’m looking for is for the current version to work as it is suppose to. Mobile devices, etc. Get the thing working and then focus on particular copy protection schemes as they come up.

There is a difference between staying current with copy protection schemes and rewriting the core of the application. Adding Pathplayer certainly is a major addition. Lets get all of what is already in place working reliably please. Get a solid version, keep it updated for copy protection.

Then have a development version that folks who want to play with, to play with.

Maybe that’s unrealistic.

Your request is reasonable to a point. From the largest software companies that charge upwards to 400 for their software ( Microsoft Vista to name one) to the smallest software companies that charge 49.99 for their software, none will ever be perfect as hard as you wish or as hard as the authors of these software try. Stable is a very widely used term, DVD Fab is extremely stable. If it were not nobody would buy it. It is a program with many functions that has to be compatible will most configurations. I have a top end computer and I understand that not everything is perfect, but little tweaks will always be needed in any software program, all software programs update. That is the way of the business, keeping up with current technology is not easy and I think this author has done a fantastic job with this Version. It flat out works. Like I said maybe a tweak or two is needed but tell me 1 software program that does not update and I will tell you that they will be out of business very soon. All in all Fengtao’s program is extremely stable if not more stable than any other program of this nature. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, this is mine.

I’ll give you a threereal world examples, small software company, in fact open source to big software company.

BitPM. It is an application for managing cell phones.

There are two versions. The stable version. The beta version. You want to play with new features, variables, etc., you play with the beta version. You want stable, you use the stable version.

DD-WRT firmware for several wireless routers. Stable version, beta versions, release candidate versions. You want stable, you use the stable version. You want to play, you use beta or release candidate versions.

There are many other examples with Microsoft. Current release candidates for SP3 XP as an example. And yes, I used dreaded Microsoft as an example.

When a software package has a version in which features work, like mobile conversion, and then release a new version in which those previously working features now exhibit problems of prior releases, like A/V out-of-synch, that is evidence of a problematic process. No one is talking about intentions. I’m sure everyone intends for the software to be stable on each release.

There is no excuse for the reintroduction of problems that have been fixed already.

Will there be problems with new features, issues that need to be tweaked as the software grows? Absolutely. I expect and accept that to be the nature of the beast. Am glad and amazed at the progress of this software and its capabilities. Am more than happy to try some of those new features out and discover bugs.

That is not what I am talking about.

When in the development process old bugs are reintroduced, that is a “process” problem and needs to be addressed and corrected. I’m sorry but I am not going to budge from the opinion that the reintroduction of old squashed bugs is problematic. It doesn’t matter how big or small a company is nor the intentions of software engineers.

And just to make sure we stay in context here, I appreciate DVDFab, use it, will continue to use it, support it, am not going anywhere in regards to some other software. I am amazed at the attention it is paid by its authors and its growing features.

They just need to nail down a version so it is stable, all features work as expected and set aside resources on keeping that version up to date on copy protection schemes.

Then have a development version that will certainly introduce all kinds of variables and issues that people can play with as they choose to. Once that version is stable, release it as the new version.

Right now the two software goals are getting mixed together. Updating copy protection and introducing new features mixed in each update. TOO many variables at once introducing unnecessary “issues” some of them old issues.

I don’t think that under appreciates the work being done nor the product nor is it unreasonable in any way. And it is not unusual out there in the software world either. Quite common in fact.

Whether that will happen or not is not up to me of course.

[QUOTE=jsmiddleton4;1943040] Get a solid version, keep it updated for copy protection.

Then have a development version that folks who want to play with, to play with.

Maybe that’s unrealistic.[/QUOTE]

I dunno, maybe it is unrealistic, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to bring up. From my own perspective, anything to do with the development of this software is way over my head, so clearly, I have no real “informed” opinion.

I’m guessing many of us, me anyway, have thought at times maybe Fengtao is trying to do too much, ie., trying to be everything to every user. It’s hard to find fault with this, but because of this and because platinum is the best software of its kind, IMO, Fengtao and Ting have earned my admiration and respect.

Personally, my problems with platinum have been minor glitches and few and far between. For the most part, these glitches have been reported by a number of users and are generally fixed with the next version within 1-2 days. I have platinum installed on 2 desktops and 1 laptop and have little or no trouble period. I certainly understand that are users that, for whatever reasons, have serious and ongoing problems.

There’s no question that this is a complicated business and trying to keep a stable, but still dynamic software (at least in terms of decryption, not to mention all the features and modes) happily married to so many users and various systems, is a daunting task indeed.

Just my 2 cents.

Posted by jmiddleton4
I am amazed at the attention it is paid by its authors and its growing features.

It amazes me also, so we agree that the author is doing all he can to make this product the best it can be. Sometime when you fix one thing it has an adverse effect on another ( the nature of the beast as you say) I enjoy this software and I think you do also. Fengtao is doing his best. I cannot ask for more, he also wants this program to be the best it can be, and it is up to him to update it as he see fit, I personally appreciate the efforts he puts into this program and use it daily. I find nothing so dire that would cause him to revert back to a version that had a problem in another area. All software authors have to be forward looking. And as for BitPM, I am familiar with that program and it has real problems with the new Verizon Chocolate and will update. Fab also has 2 versions the Stable Final Version and a beta. All software cannot be be compatible with every ones configurations. I think Fengtao trys as hard , if not harder than any author out there. Again just my opinion.

I assume an example of what you[JSM] mean would be:

dvd fab standard platinum
this software would deal strictly with copy protection of standard and HD dvd’s only and would only be updated when new protection is introduced.

dvd fab future gold
this version would be for everything including ipods,pda’s mobile, pcp, cell phones and whatever the hell gadget they develope down the road that makes us slave dependant on which is what technology does.

I just think its too much to try and accomplish both at the same time in the same product, add features and keep up with copy protection.

We need a stable version that just focuses on copy protection updates. Doesn’t introduce any new variables with each introduction of new features.

If there ever comes a time that the software actually does support external codecs, I hope by that time something like I am proposing is in place. Can you imagine all those variables? Nightmare!

If there were two versions for what you say there should be then I’m sure that’d be more work then just trying to update it in one. And the new variables as you call it like pathplayer were introduced to make it easier to copy more of the newer dvds, and it just happened that the added variable enabled the use of more features, which I am sure many people enjoy like me.

[quote=jsmiddleton4;1943118]I just think its too much to try and accomplish both at the same time in the same product, add features and keep up with copy protection.

We need a stable version that just focuses on copy protection updates. Doesn’t introduce any new variables with each introduction of new features.

If there ever comes a time that the software actually does support external codecs, I hope by that time something like I am proposing is in place. Can you imagine all those variables? Nightmare![/quote]
I totally agree, but Fengtao has taken this " nightmare and is slowly but surely turning the nightmare into a Great Dream that will come true, variables are many and too accomplish this task will take a great amount of time and knowledge, Fengtao has devoted 5 years into this program and I for one appreciate every minute. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are still in the dawn of its technology, keeping up with it is a great task, I am sure the end product ( if there is such a thing) will be used and appreciated by many users. At the rate of new encryptions and devices being developed it is amazing to me that the program can do as much as it does.

[I][I]At the rate of new encryptions and devices being developed it is amazing to me that the program can do as much as it does.[/I][/I]I

[I]have to say,[/I]
I really agree with that statement…

[QUOTE=jsmiddleton4;1943076]I’ll give you a threereal world examples, small software company, in fact open source to big software company.

BitPM. It is an application for managing cell phones.

There are two versions. The stable version. The beta version. You want to play with new features, variables, etc., you play with the beta version. You want stable, you use the stable version.

DD-WRT firmware for several wireless routers. Stable version, beta versions, release candidate versions. You want stable, you use the stable version. You want to play, you use beta or release candidate versions.

There are many other examples with Microsoft. Current release candidates for SP3 XP as an example. And yes, I used dreaded Microsoft as an example.

When a software package has a version in which features work, like mobile conversion, and then release a new version in which those previously working features now exhibit problems of prior releases, like A/V out-of-synch, that is evidence of a problematic process. No one is talking about intentions. I’m sure everyone intends for the software to be stable on each release.

There is no excuse for the reintroduction of problems that have been fixed already.

Will there be problems with new features, issues that need to be tweaked as the software grows? Absolutely. I expect and accept that to be the nature of the beast. Am glad and amazed at the progress of this software and its capabilities. Am more than happy to try some of those new features out and discover bugs.

That is not what I am talking about.

When in the development process old bugs are reintroduced, that is a “process” problem and needs to be addressed and corrected. I’m sorry but I am not going to budge from the opinion that the reintroduction of old squashed bugs is problematic. It doesn’t matter how big or small a company is nor the intentions of software engineers.

And just to make sure we stay in context here, I appreciate DVDFab, use it, will continue to use it, support it, am not going anywhere in regards to some other software. I am amazed at the attention it is paid by its authors and its growing features.

They just need to nail down a version so it is stable, all features work as expected and set aside resources on keeping that version up to date on copy protection schemes.

Then have a development version that will certainly introduce all kinds of variables and issues that people can play with as they choose to. Once that version is stable, release it as the new version.

Right now the two software goals are getting mixed together. Updating copy protection and introducing new features mixed in each update. TOO many variables at once introducing unnecessary “issues” some of them old issues.

I don’t think that under appreciates the work being done nor the product nor is it unreasonable in any way. And it is not unusual out there in the software world either. Quite common in fact.

Whether that will happen or not is not up to me of course.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for your post,then why is since fab first came out they could never get movie with menus right, clone dvd2 does it correctly 99.9% of the time, i like fab but it does some ware things in custom mode i copy boat trip menus check and remove annoying pgc box check, rip and burn no play on home dvd so i took same copy reripped in clone dvd2 movies only burned it and it played fine, second problem i rip and burned in full mode tv series and checked the box jump to first menu when disc inserted after burn it stated to play on third esopied, so my question is which box needs to be check so it brings me right to menu like any dvd does,its a simple question and if fab can’t do it right then allow us to use any dvd while using fab program.

“I’m sure that’d be more work then just trying to update it in one.”

Different? Yes. It would be a bit different. The stable version would have to be managed in terms of copy protection updates. I agree that it would be different. But “more”? I’m not sure about more. In one way you could make an argument that it would be less work. One version would only be getting copy protection scheme updates. It of course would have a life span. As the development version gets stable or reasonably reliable, then it is the released version. So you are only talking about finite period of time for support for updates.

Again this is not uncommon or unheard of. And I’m not saying drop Pathplayer. I’m saying get this version stable. Stop adding features to this version. Get all it does now, which is pretty amazing, stable and reliable. Get a system in place that keeps a stable and reliable version 4’s copy protection up to date. THEN do whatever you want with the next version. Add features galore to a developmental version.

Incremental releases for version 4 should only be to add copy protection updates not features nor break or cause its features to become unstable.

This is also a way that software companies generate income. You pay for version 4. You get support for version 4. When version 5 comes out, you can decide to buy version 5 or stay with version 4.

While some will disagree I think that’s the way it should be. Software engineers and developers deserve to be paid for their investment/development.