The Next Feature Vote

Now that Renoise 1.9 is very close to completion, and it being the the best Renoise release ever and all, I’d like a new feature vote for the “next big thing”, which will probably be called Renoise 2 (that is, if the whole idea of voting for features is still around at that time?)

During the development of Renoise1.8, the feature votes held the following options for us to vote for - I’m guessing that a lot of these features are still valid entries for a Renoise2 vote - and if I were a bookmaker, I’d recommend betting on either the arranger, or instrument structure, unless some black horse decides to join the race :slight_smile:


A Mixer view
(712 Credits)

An Arranger view (visually arrange PatternSequences and Blocks)
(655 Credits)

Audio recording in the SampleEditor
(645 Credits)

Sub-tick timing
(587 Credits)

Improved Instrument (RNI) structure
(571 Credits)

A Better and bigger disk browser
(548 Credits)

More Modulation Meta Devices
(542 Credits)

More (and more complex) MIDI mappings
(479 Credits)

A Renoise VST plug
(423 Credits)

A Piano Roll view
(414 Credits)

Renoise as ReWire Slave
(370 Credits)

DirectX Plugins support [Windows]
(338 Credits)

Renoise as ReWire Master
(332 Credits)

Audio-Units support [Mac]
(198 Credits)

I’ve already mentioned this in the first 1.9 beta release topic:

Until 2.0 we’ll not start new votes, but clean up some stuff (internally) that waited so long to be done. So the next voting will start after the 2.0 release.

This also means that 2.0 will not be a monster release - it will be a 0.1 update.
Clearly our fault. Reading the wishes and ideas forum topics here, people expect a lot from a version which is called 2.0. Seems it would have been wiser to call the 1.9 release 2.0 then…

Hi taktik, and uhm…my bad for not realizing that voting was not a thing of past…
That’s great, as I really appreciate the whole idea of the Renoise voting system!

Why is that? Well, developers of a given software always keep a todo-list. Some keep it to themselves, others leave it public. I think this vote-for-features concept (which is unique, AFAIK) has a bit of both: some features are decided by the users, while the general direction the software is taking is firmly in the developers control (thus avoiding the ‘too many chefs’ problem, featuritis etc.).

And speaking of 2.0, it’s just a number - keep’em coming :guitar: