thank you all for the support. 
honestly, I’m perhaps a bit oversensitive at times on ‘expectations’ towards developers on the internet/forums, not just for my software, but also others, including small companies. unfortunately, I know from first hand experience, it can make some developers feel reluctant and shy away from communicating with their users… which is a bad thing for us all.
again to be clear, this is not about reporting issues, bugs, things that could be improved - that’s all cool, and very useful for developers… and actually its a side I enjoy - its about respecting there are many things going on behind the scenes, that influence timelines, design, architecture.
anyway, all cool, I’ve had great experiences with feedback for Orac and other projects I work on - that’s why I do open source projects, and will continue to do so 
absolutely cool, no patch, software, product can be right for everyone,
that’s the cool thing about the organelle, we have the choice to use as we wish,.
that said, I’m, still interested to hear ‘why’, or what/if you things could be improved.
perhaps for some, its lack of functionality… and this may improve with time,
however, there are probably also some fundamental reasons, which are almost inevitable (by design).
-
complexity/learning curve
inevitably, with a complex multi function software, its more complex to use than a single function patch. this means a learning curve / time investment … this ‘investment’ only makes sense if you need/want its functionality/complex operations. -
one function design
this is really interesting conceptually…
if you have the PD skills, you can build specific patches using building blocks, and you don’t care if its changeable dynamically. this is a really good approach.
interestingly, the guys at blokas/pisound, have been using the tech behind Orac (oKontrol/mec) in this way
the only problem with this approach, is it only works for those that want to program/patch … and that is not for everyone, for many reasons.
as I said on another thread the other day, one of my favourite patches on the organelle is the C&G Rhodes patch - its simplicity is a large factor in why I love it so much.
actually, I like quite a few of the original C&G “one page” patches.
I think they are cleverly designed to have the essence of what is needed to control - its also why musicians love ‘knob per function’ synths - its all to easy as a designer with menus and multi page designs, to just throw more and more parameters at the user, rather than really think about what they really need… often ‘less is more’ !