Feature Requests Site or Document

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ feature suggestions Feature Requests Site or Document

This topic contains 5 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of jakethepeg jakethepeg 5 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #68947
    Profile photo of jakethepeg

    Does anyone else get annoyed with having feature requests entered as discussion items and replys on this community site? Wouldn’t it be better to setup a google doc same as has been done for compatible usb drives where users can enter feature requests?

    @alexs, could you set this up?

    And if you could add some of us community users as administrators for the sheet, when a feature request is upvoted on here, we could record on the sheet.

    And same for Qu?

    Thanks, Jake.

    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H

    Hi Jake,

    Sorry to hear that it annoys you, but there are reasons why community feature requests are currently discussed here, rather than just listed.
    One main reason is that we log requests from a number of different sources, so although we definitely encourage people to place requests here, we must also consider direct requests from dealers/distributors/users (and there are obviously a lot of other factors too).
    If we were to create an open list, it could easily be mistaken for a definitive feature request list, and with upvoting, we could end up in a situation where people expect the top request to be implemented, which in some cases may not even be possible, and certainly would not represent users outside of the community.

    What can definitely be used in our R&D process are informal feature requests, as we have here. This means we are able to spot some of the small ‘wouldn’t it be cool if…’ features as well as avoiding a possible situation where the list could be influenced heavily by just a handful of people.


    Profile photo of GCumbee

    I think a lot of power users have given up on good feature requests than have been ignored while updates add things they don’t need. Example. Continued mic presets over something like HPF on outputs. Pro users don’t need mic presets. They need useful tools.

    Profile photo of jakethepeg

    Thanks @keithjah for your response.

    Did you see any positives of a consolidated list?

    1) no duplicate requests (and the subsequent replies with duplicate questions/answers/+1 up-votes/comments/criticism)
    2) list of users who want each feature (this could be valuable feedback for a marketing/R&D team – even if you don’t act on it..)
    3) a column for A&H feedback (i – can’t be done due to hardware limitations, ii – already in R&D list, iii – will consider if enough people request, iv – too much work to justify)
    4) add a column for A&H cost (I think enough users would pay for the offline editor so it would almost be crowd funded!)
    5) better communication = happier customers = happier supplier = everyone wins?!

    This was simply intended as a way to improve the handling of requests, both for users and for A&H. I wasn’t meaning you needed to change your systems or anything..

    Please do consider the crowd funding concept though – I’d happily contribute to some of the feature requests!! I could get a website setup to track this if it’d be used..

    Unfortunately @gcumbee, (mostly gimmicky) mic presets will sell more desks than HPF on outputs :).

    Profile photo of GCumbee

    Sad but true. Give us tools not tricks.

    Profile photo of jakethepeg

    But yes, +1, +2 & +3 for HPF on ouputs!! so often have to waste band 1 as a high pass.. 🙂

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.