# POLL: Preferred DAW/program for work with sample libraries 2018/19?



## Vik (Jul 18, 2018)

Not necessarily focusing on what you use right now, but which DAW or program do you believe is the best for work with orchestral sample libraries? I'm thinking og all kinds of work here: composing/arranging/orchestration/handling the libraries (eg CC automation and articulation control) and so on.

Many use a dedicated score program for making the final score, but the intention with this poll is to figure out what your viewpoints are in terms of working with sample (or sample modeling) libraries.

Nevertheless - if you think that score programs are best also from a sample library perspective, I've included these as well. And if you don't think Finale/Sibelius/Dorico etc are relevant options, or think that they shouldn't even be on the list, just ignore them. 

Please vote!


----------



## Vik (Jul 20, 2018)

Oh, I forgot to mention that you can change your votes later if needed.


----------



## Piano Pete (Jul 20, 2018)

I think Cubase is kind of hard to beat with the level of functionality and control over midi parts. Honestly though, I think it comes down to whatever programs' workflow jells best with the user.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jul 20, 2018)

Wow. Think I just had a bad case of deja vu.


----------



## D Halgren (Jul 20, 2018)




----------



## robgb (Jul 20, 2018)

Reaper because of cost, portability, customization, frequent updates, rock solid and very talented user base, SWS extensions, custom actions, user scripting, excellent midi editing, amazing routing options, snapshots, track templates, mouse modifiers, and hundreds of themes (skins).


----------



## Motr3b (Jul 20, 2018)

hi,
i'm a fl studio user, i started the whole thing around a year ago,at the beginnig i wasted 9 months of my precious time on making rap beats and now, it's been 3 month that i'm learning all about orchestral songs.
i'm planing to switch to either reaper or studio one. i like Fl studio and its user friendly environment and the fact that arranging lines is so easy in FL (though this makes the project messy sometimes) but one thing that i don't like about Fl is the way i have to deal with cc automation, it feels like those at image line didn't like the program have a suitable way of automating CC's but they had to add the option for obvious reasons, so they ended up with the horrible idea of "midi out" plugin. it's pure bullshit.
so to those of you who use either reaper or studio one, which one has these 3 options that i'm looking for???
1. a very proper and easy way to automate midi CC's.
2. the ghost notes option that fl has, it show the midi notes of the other plugins and tracks
3. Score logger, fl studio has this option. it holds the last 10 (or 30) minutes played notes that you didn't recorded. so you can have whatever you played without recording them.it's very useful. Logic and cubase have this option too.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Jul 21, 2018)

EpicDude said:


> I started with FL Studio (not good for orchestral music), then Studio One (very intuitive although is missing some features like expression maps is still the best option for me) and then I tried Cubase Pro 9.5 ( not intuitive at all, to complicated and buggy) for 30 days but I didn’t like it.



I've tried most (did the 30 Cubase demo as well), own a few.

but keep coming back to Studio One Pro (v4.0.1) & Vienna Ensemble Pro 6.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 21, 2018)

Began on Reason (which was a very cool program but NOT suited to scoring AT ALL). After that went Cubase a couple of years. Good program, but got fed up with Steinberg outright not updating previously implemented features and the extremely lackluster updates that were 9 and 9.5. Not that they were bad, but I expected so much more from a company that brought us so many innovations in the past. I want to get excited about updates, but haven't been for over 2 years now.

Had a good run with Reaper before deciding it wasn't for me. It's still luring me sometimes, but the reliance on third party scripts to even get close to the basic functionality that I'm used to is putting me off. Great program, excellent support, tons of functionality except the one thing I care most about and that is native transforming of CC's. Unless they implement that, it will be a no go for me (shame because the rest of the program is SO GOOD). That said, my love has already been won over.

Studio One 4 is where I'm at now, and if Presonus keep the exciting updates up, I don't think I ever have to switch anymore. They show the kind of innovation, implementation and focus Steinberg used to have. Presonus seems to be the only company trying to push the DAW (okay, apart from Cockos, but that development is REALLY different) into the actual 21st century, speeding up decade long processes and making it easier and more inspiring to be creative. It works where it counts most: it's the most inspiring program I've ever used. Between the awesome transform tool (beating out Cubase's by a wide margin), the visualisation of CC's as automation, the ease of the automation in general, the mind bendingly awesome and easy to use multi-instruments and especially multi-FX, fantastic integration with Notion, the drag and drop functionality, the awesome browser, Sample One XT beating out the Cubase Sampler Track so much it's silly, AAF export and import, loading tracks from other projects from the browser without having to load the project (BIG DEAL if you're into modular templates), the workflow relation between Impact XT and patterns, the mind blowing Chord Track that, again, just beats the Cubase one over the head, the great mastering page, complete integration with Melodyne and ARA, the intuitive and beautifully relaxed (and light!) UI, unbeatable integration with professional Presonus hardware, etc.

I could go on and on and on about the program. For me it's the only DAW not stuck in the paradigms of the 20th century, throwing away processes that used to be cumbersome and convoluted. One thing for me is just rendering a piece of midi to audio. Just a press of a button. Nothing more. But wait! Want to go back? Thanks to that ARA integration, you don't even have to go back. Just edit the embedded midi information and you're good to go. It has so many ''why did nobody think of it this way before?!'' moments it makes other programs seem ancient by comparison (and some are). The way these guys integrate features into their DAW, the interrelationship between features and functionality and ease of use just make Steinberg look like clowns (not to be disrespectful). It hasn't got all the advanced functionality of older, more 'mature' DAWs. Some older users might hate it for that and will miss some functionality, but for me, I miss almost nothing. If Presonus comes through and adds a couple more features for film and game guys, I'm done. I will finally have the DAW that does everything I will ever need. I mean it.

EVERYTHING.

It's beautiful having seen this DAW grow from 2.6 and not being able to stand up to literally see it barging through the status quo with version 3.5/4. Mark my words, there's a generation of musician's coming that will do away with the old and embrace the new. Steinberg and Avid aren't just going anywhere, but they're not the untouchable giants they used to be. There's a new kid in town, guys. And boy is that kid talented.

Edit: apologies for my abuse of caps. I'm just a very enthousiastic person sometimes.


----------



## jbuhler (Jul 21, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> Studio One 4 is where I'm at now, and if Presonus keep the exciting updates up, I don't think I ever have to switch anymore. They show the kind of innovation, implementation and focus Steinberg used to have. Presonus seems to be the only company trying to push the DAW (okay, apart from Cockos, but that development is REALLY different) into the actual 21st century, speeding up decade long processes and making it easier and more inspiring to be creative. It works where it counts most: it's the most inspiring program I've ever used. Between the awesome transform tool (beating out Cubase's by a wide margin), the visualisation of CC's as automation, the ease of the automation in general, the mind bendingly awesome and easy to use multi-instruments and especially multi-FX, fantastic integration with Notion, the drag and drop functionality, the awesome browser, Sample One XT beating out the Cubase Sampler Track so much it's silly, AAF export and import, loading tracks from other projects from the browser without having to load the project (BIG DEAL if you're into modular templates), the workflow relation between Impact XT and patterns, the mind blowing Chord Track that, again, just beats the Cubase one over the head, the great mastering page, complete integration with Melodyne and ARA, the intuitive and beautifully relaxed (and light!) UI, unbeatable integration with professional Presonus hardware, etc.
> 
> I could go on and on and on about the program. For me it's the only DAW not stuck in the paradigms of the 20th century, throwing away processes that used to be cumbersome and convoluted. One thing for me is just rendering a piece of midi to audio. Just a press of a button. Nothing more. But wait! Want to go back? Thanks to that ARA integration, you don't even have to go back. Just edit the embedded midi information and you're good to go. It has so many ''why did nobody think of it this way before?!'' moments it makes other programs seem ancient by comparison (and some are). The way these guys integrate features into their DAW, the interrelationship between features and functionality and ease of use just make Steinberg look like clowns (not to be disrespectful). It hasn't got all the advanced functionality of older, more 'mature' DAWs. Some older users might hate it for that and will miss some functionality, but for me, I miss almost nothing. If Presonus comes through and adds a couple more features for film and game guys, I'm done. I will finally have the DAW that does everything I will ever need. I mean it.
> 
> ...



I like Studio One quite a lot and have been using it on and off since version 2. But I have yet to find a work flow that makes midi editing simple and I find that works much better in Logic, though Logic has other problems. Studio One also doesn't handle surround, it frequently crashes on close when using Kontakt, and its manual is often opaque, though that can be said of most DAW manuals in my experience. (From watching many composing videos, Cubase seems to have superior midi editing, though I've not ever used it.) Things I love about Studio One are the sketchpad and the way the simple and intuitive way the arranger track works to move sections of music around. Also, I agree that Studio One has done a lot of innovating.


----------



## robgb (Jul 21, 2018)

I second (third? fourth?) Studio One. It was the DAW I was using before Reaper and it's a really good one.


----------



## Vik (Jul 21, 2018)

Has Studio One gotten anything like this yet?
https://answers.presonus.com/3240/articulation-editor


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 21, 2018)

Vik said:


> Has Studio One gotten anything like this yet?
> https://answers.presonus.com/3240/articulation-editor



No, but very likely coming very soon, given it's the biggest user request now I think...


----------



## shawnsingh (Jul 21, 2018)

Wow, the way you all are talking about Reaper and Studio One so passionately is motivating me to learn more about them. Otherwise I was just complacently resisting the idea of looking at another DAW because it's such a large effort to become fast and comfortable with a new one.

I'm very happy with Cubase, but there are a lot of little minor workflow things and bugs I wish could be improved. Being able to extend Reaper functionality is extremely attractive since I'm comfortable with programming... And the innovations you described in studio one sound like they're worth considering in my workflow, too.

So yeah thanks for these opinions, I'm going to look into them!


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Jul 21, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> No, but very likely coming very soon, given it's the biggest user request now I think...



i have a feeling the S1Pro v4.x.x updates are going to be interesting.

the articulation editor would be a game changer.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 22, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> i have a feeling the S1Pro v4.x.x updates are going to be interesting.
> 
> the articulation editor would be a game changer.



They know this as well...


----------



## jbuhler (Jul 22, 2018)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> i have a feeling the S1Pro v4.x.x updates are going to be interesting.
> 
> the articulation editor would be a game changer.


Agreed, and midi capabilities seem to have received little attention in upgrade from 3 to 4.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jul 22, 2018)

Wow. Think I just had a bad case of deja vu.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Jul 22, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> Agreed, and midi capabilities seem to have received little attention in upgrade from 3 to 4.



given it's the biggest user request now I think...


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Jul 22, 2018)

Jdiggity1 said:


> Wow. Think I just had a bad case of deja vu.



They know this as well...


----------



## Nevermeister (Jul 23, 2018)

Cubase. Expression maps is a must. I also love Reaper for guitar works and audio.


----------



## Vik (Jul 23, 2018)

Nevermeister said:


> Cubase. Expression maps is a must.


FYI, Cubase isn't the only one with expression maps anymore.


----------



## jononotbono (Jul 23, 2018)

Cubase does it for me. Love it.


----------



## Vik (Jul 23, 2018)

I was very interested in Cubase for a while, even bought the program and gave it (and Dorico) a try. 

But partially because I know Logic so well, and because Cubase and Dorico IMHO has many cumbersome workflow solutions, I'm still on Logic, which also has gotten a little better (with an expression map equivalent and some improvements in other areas). _A main thing I regularly miss in Logic, though, is something Cubase has: the ability to unload Kontakt samples when freezing a track (and reload upon unfreeze) + a general option to fully disable am instrument track and free up sample and Kontakt memory._ 

Handling CC Automation/smart controls also need improvements. 

Other than that, I mainly miss functions that are related to musical decisions - not technical/mix/audio decisions, like some of the stuff I liked in Sibelius (but which I see no signs of Dorico getting):

Logic has no dedicated Ideas Hub (like Sibelius) for organising users ideas (and using the Apple loop function for doing that means many limitations). 
The score development has been slow for many years now, but there are hints about improvements here
The key command for go to next/previous only plays one note at a time when there are chords. Bummer, especially when editing piano compositions. 
Likewise, transposing a single MIDI note with a key command doesn't allow immediate auditioning of all the notes in piano chords. Major bummer for me.

So, in general: commands related to composing... so I wonder what Logic 11 (10.5?), and future versions of Cubase and Dorico will bring. Meanwhile, I'll keep using Logic, at least until Steinberg improves their apps in terms of how easy/hard it is to learn it for someone who knows another DAW really well, and have done that for many years.


----------



## Akarin (Jul 23, 2018)

As someone who doesn't play keys very well and is just at the beginning of learning music theory, Cubase is the perfect DAW for me: Chord Track. Can't live without it. Also things like Expression Maps (I've written about 50 of those), Drum Maps, remembering the zoom level on the MIDI grid, etc. 

Tried Studio One for a while but small quirks like it not supporting my Komplete S61 or not being able to input a send level with keyboard digits (have to do it with the mouse) makes it a no go.


----------



## Rap-sody (Jul 23, 2018)

I join my voice to Studio One 4. With all the features added over time, and the certainty that more good stuff is coming next, it's an all-in-one DAW able to do almost everything great. Some room for improvement, but overall excellent.


----------



## jbuhler (Jul 23, 2018)

Akarin said:


> As someone who doesn't play keys very well and is just at the beginning of learning music theory, Cubase is the perfect DAW for me: Chord Track. Can't live without it. Also things like Expression Maps (I've written about 50 of those), Drum Maps, remembering the zoom level on the MIDI grid, etc.
> 
> Tried Studio One for a while but small quirks like it not supporting my Komplete S61 or not being able to input a send level with keyboard digits (have to do it with the mouse) makes it a no go.


It's actually the other way around: Native Instruments doesn't support Studio One and they discontinued Mackie Support (or at least Mackie hasn't yet been implemented in the MKII). I found that the Korg Nano Studio (which supports Studio One) fits nicely on an empty portion of the top of the S61 MKII and restores most of the functionality of the S61 while adding functionality not included with the S61. Version 4 also has a version of chord track.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 25, 2018)

jbuhler said:


> It's actually the other way around: Native Instruments doesn't support Studio One and they discontinued Mackie Support (or at least Mackie hasn't yet been implemented in the MKII). I found that the Korg Nano Studio (which supports Studio One) fits nicely on an empty portion of the top of the S61 MKII and restores most of the functionality of the S61 while adding functionality not included with the S61. Version 4 also has a version of chord track.



And one that puts the Cubase one to shame as it can also handle audio. Cubase however was first with the idea. You see this a lot with Studio One. Someone comes up with an idea, they take and add to it substantially. You can call this lazy, but in my DAW I don't care. I don't want it being original, I want it to work.


----------



## Akarin (Jul 25, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> And one that puts the Cubase one to shame as it can also handle audio. Cubase however was first with the idea. You see this a lot with Studio One. Someone comes up with an idea, they take and add to it substantially. You can call this lazy, but in my DAW I don't care. I don't want it being original, I want it to work.



Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I tried it, S1 Chord Track can't give audio feedback when you click on a chord, you can't map chords to keys on your keyboard, doesn't do inversions automatically and when you apply it to a MIDI track, you can't copy-paste the result to another track (only the original chord gets copied), and many more other features like this which make S1 Chord Track a good start but very far from its older brother. As for the audio part, it's nice sure, but I only work with MIDI when composing, not using loops or pre-made audio tracks. To me, it seems more oriented towards EDM than orchestral composition. Of course, I may be wrong and would need to learn how to use it effectively. Only spent a day or two with it.


----------



## Nevermeister (Jul 25, 2018)

Vik said:


> FYI, Cubase isn't the only one with expression maps anymore.


 Yes i know. I tried to use Reaper's articulation scripts, for example, but i found Cubase more intuitive and easy to use.


----------



## MarcelM (Jul 25, 2018)

for orchestral work there is nothing what comes close to cubase. i do use it mostly but also sometimes logic. i like studio one aswell, but i hate the gui so i dont use it actually. reaper? no. gave it a try a couple of times since its cpu usage is superb, but the rest is not mine


----------



## Vik (Jul 25, 2018)

Nevermeister said:


> Yes i know. I tried to use Reaper's articulation scripts, for example, but i found Cubase more intuitive and easy to use.


I don't know how Reaper works, and Apple's Articulation IDs may not be optimised for 3rd part libraries yet, but the Logic solution lets you add articulations on each note, meaning that you can have several articulations happening on the same track, at the same time. Dorico also has Expression Maps.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Sep 23, 2018)

Cubase is still king for working with sample libraries and large track counts (1000+) disabled or not. Couple that with the Logical Editors, Visibility agents etc., it's hard to beat. Some parts could use an upgrade for sure.

I am hoping Studio One adds articulation maps and works on the ability to handle large amounts of tracks without LONG save times. Their automation system, both regular and midi is what I always wish Cubase had. I also hope they open up their JavaScripting and expose the API so we can do some Reaper like customization. It's a modern, cleaned up DAW for the 21st century and it feels like it.

Gotta love Reaper and the amazing ingenious community behind it. Despite it's insane flexibility, and lietrally unlimited potential, I find the other DAW's far easier and more pleasant as far as GUI and interaction to work in despite setting up tons of scripts, and the Frankenstein nature of the whole thing leaves me cold...


----------



## samphony (Feb 10, 2019)

DS_Joost said:


> No, but very likely coming very soon, given it's the biggest user request now I think...


It’s funny to see that my feature request is one of the most popular on the PreSonus forum right now from a logic user perspective. I’m curious how the Presonus devs will implement it. 

Like vik I’m mainly using logic as I know it so well but for both DAWs I wish they would add visibility agents like cubase has.


----------



## musicalweather (Feb 11, 2019)

Really interesting discussion here. I appreciate everyone's insights into the different DAWs. I've been a faithful DP user for about 15 years. Recently got Logic in order to teach composition to a student who had it, and it's been enlightening to compare the two programs. Here's a fascinating, in-depth look at and rating of several different DAWs. (I can't imagine it hasn't been already mentioned on this forum, but I'll include it here anyway.). Well worth the read, even if you don't agree with the ratings. And here's the author's gripes about DP. Yikes.


----------



## Solarsentinel (Feb 11, 2019)

Hi all,
For now my DAW is ableton. Yes i know it is not popular for orchestral work, but it's the DAW which i'm the most confortable with. Everything is so easy with it.
I tried cubase and studio one when i started to learn music and i went not be able to learn them quick.
I found that Ableton is a good all rounder. You can do all sorts of things with these two modes of view. The session view can be used for sketching ideas that you can play and switch instantly, and with the arrangement view you can do your stuff more normally. I like the good compatibility with hardware like synths or controllers and also the vst'ies.
I like also the way we can do automations and how we can handle audio with all the rooting possibilities. It's very quick for sound design purpose.
I think it lacks some midi features like multi clip editing, a chord track, and a more tradionnal view for mixing purpose in order to be complete.
I tried many times to use cubase, but i'm always blocked with the way they displayed everything. And for studio one the compatibility problems with controllers is a real break for me.
But It is just my feelings .
For resume you can do orchestral music with ableton, perhaps not so quick against cubase or logic but it works


----------



## waveheavy (Sep 24, 2019)

Here's my honest 2 cents. I'm using a PC with Windows 7 Pro, 32 Gig RAM, Quad Core, multiple SSD.

Studio One 3 & 4 ---- nice command setup, easy. Nice drag & drop instruments into the main display to create a track, easiest of all DAWs I've tried. Mixer display could use more work, horizontal spacing gap between instrument faders and master faders, didn't find it useful. Automation lanes could use some work in main display. I find automation lanes apart from their instrument track confusing. It won't fully work with my Nektar LX88+ keyboard, only recognizes my Mod wheel and that's it (I've been to Nektar's support, downloaded latest controller files, etc. Still no joy.)

Digital Performer 9 for Windows ---- not happy at all. They still need a lot more work to transplant this to work on Windows. I couldn't even record my guitar through my Apollo interface, with support from both MOTU and UAD. MOTU just quit responding to my help requests. DP is setup nice for film composing, but still a lot of things you've got to do manually that shouldn't be. And there's need for more error programming. Try to do something and hit a wrong key or command and you'll often get a crash. I suspect the Mac version is more robust, as DP came out originally for the Mac and hasn't been on Windows that long.

SONAR ---- it tried to keep up, and was a pretty good DAW. Got some of my best big band Jazz mixes on it. It still tried to process under heavy loads which degraded the audio, when it should have issued a warning. Needed some more error programming in that area. I didn't like the double tracks assignment for MIDI requirement, which is similar to Cubase. 

Pro Tools ---- great for mixing. Not really bad for MIDI. It's got Step Note Entry, what more could a non-keyboard player want? PT is very robust in the error catching area. If you've got the CPU and RAM power, I find it's more stable than any of the above DAWs. Just don't expect a lot of bells and whistles like the other DAWs.


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 25, 2019)

this thread is in the wrong forum section?


----------



## Snarf (Sep 25, 2019)

I didn't expect Studio One to be so popular! It's a good DAW even though it's missing a few important features.


----------



## SupremeFist (Sep 25, 2019)

Abandoned Cubase in the 1990s because it had a showstopping bug relating to hitpoints when scoring to picture which wasn't fixed for too long, and have been on Logic ever since. But sometimes I wonder if I should switch back so I am not held to ransom over the increasingly bad Apple hardware...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 26, 2019)

SupremeFist said:


> Abandoned Cubase in the 1990s because it had a showstopping bug relating to hitpoints when scoring to picture which wasn't fixed for too long, and have been on Logic ever since. But sometimes I wonder if I should switch back so I am not held to ransom over the increasingly bad Apple hardware...



Bad Apple hardware?


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Bad Apple hardware?


Except for their uber-expensive cheese grater Mac Pro, the lack of repairability/upgradability does indeed qualify Apple hardware to be labeled as "bad".


----------



## Mike Fox (Sep 26, 2019)

I was a loyal Logic user for years, then switched to Cubase a couple years back. I like it a lot more than Logic, however I will say that I see that lovely spinning wheel much more often with Cubase.


----------



## BezO (Sep 26, 2019)

I'm a year+ into Logic, coming off a long break and Pro Tools before that. I like it less a few annoying MIDI headaches. Not great with external sequencers, for example.

I've never been one to use multiple DAWs, but have been considering S1 lately. I've learned to take nothing for granted, so it may take a while to make sure it does EVERYTHING I need it to.


----------



## Symfoniq (Sep 26, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Bad Apple hardware?



Even if we ignore three generations of unreliable MacBook Pro keyboards and more generations than that of iMacs with inadequate cooling, for many of us, Apple no longer builds compelling desktop systems at a price we are willing to pay.


----------



## Uiroo (Sep 26, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Bad Apple hardware?


I had two of their power supplies for my MacBook Pro Laptop 2010 MELT (which was extremely dangerous), disfunctioning display due to loose connection, the harddrive cabel died twice, cd drive died after a few years. Obviously the power supply cable broke multiple times, but that's just accepted these days.

A good video, if you're interested:


I mean, there's probably even worse hardware on the market, but Apple's hardware definitely isn't particularly good.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 26, 2019)

That is unfortunate, hopefully just a bad batch or something. I've had countless hardware failures over the years on PC, but my 2013 MacBook Pro is still going as strong as the day I bought it.....and that's from heavy daily use. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Symfoniq (Sep 26, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> That is unfortunate, hopefully just a bad batch or something. I've had countless hardware failures over the years on PC, but my 2013 MacBook Pro is still going as strong as the day I bought it.....and that's from heavy daily use. Fingers crossed.



The 2013-2015 MacBook Pros are some of the best machines Apple ever built. I have both a 2013 and a 2015 that are still running strong.

Unfortunately, I disliked my 2016 so much that I sold it and went back to the previous generation.


----------



## jonnybutter (Sep 26, 2019)

Symfoniq said:


> The 2013-2015 MacBook Pros are some of the best machines Apple ever built. I have both a 2013 and a 2015 that are still running strong.
> 
> Unfortunately, I disliked my 2016 so much that I sold it and went back to the previous generation.




I've also got a couple older MBPs that I use the hell out of every day, and I don't think I'll ever buy a newer one. If Apple changes their minds and decides to make good laptops again, with repairable parts and non-garbage keyboards, I would consider it. But if not - why? Just for Mac OS? No.


----------



## SupremeFist (Sep 26, 2019)

Symfoniq said:


> The 2013-2015 MacBook Pros are some of the best machines Apple ever built. I have both a 2013 and a 2015 that are still running strong.
> 
> Unfortunately, I disliked my 2016 so much that I sold it and went back to the previous generation.


Not surprised, the keyboard on my 2017 MB Pro is just horrible (and it hasn't even broken yet), and I'm starting to resent the Apple tax on RAM/internal storage. That said, it is fast and quiet, and my next machine will probably be a Mini...


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2019)

My 2008 MacBook Pro is still going great, though it's about as zippy as you'd expect an old Core 2 Duo from that era to be. I have, at various times, swapped HDD, upgraded memory and replaced the two fans.

If I could get a current gen MBP with the same quality & design sensibility as the '08, I'd love to have one. But as it is, I couldn't be less interested.


----------

