Mac vs. PC - what's best? [Archive] - Northern Sound Source

Patthoven

12-04-2003, 08:20 AM

Yeah, boy this is a hot topic. Passion seems to go both ways. I use Cubase SX on PC, never had a problem. Kontakt, a few glitches here and there, Giga, same deal, as well as Spectrasonics Stylus and Atmosphere plugs. But overall, if no-one sneezes, I seem to be able to keep things working pretty well.

But holy crap, the Mac side is a mess. I don\'t think I could take it. Plus all of my investment in software is now PC or Mac pre-OSX.

I had to make the decision when I had a fire in my house 2 years ago. I bit the bullet and went with Windows, and so far, I feel like its the first good decision I ever made as far as my selected platform goes.

I love Macs, always have and always will, but I\'m still using OS 9.2.2 because every time I open up OSX, things just seem to go batty. Even with the simple stupid software that i have already loaded( not power apps).

So, I am just squeemish as hell about trying, even though I have a brand new Logic platinum for Mac sitting here that\'s never been installed. So, any and all other feedback will be welcome and helpful. But thanks guys for your opinions! images/icons/grin.gif

Alan Russell

12-04-2003, 09:20 AM

Patrick,

I\'ve always used the PC and have temporarily abandoned Giga for Kontakt v1.51 having Sonar 3.0 as my Sequence software (Motif 8 - Master Keyboard)

My Gear: 3.2ghz PIV HT with 2 gigs DDR-Ram (PC3200) This computer I built..

Maybe The WIN OS will get us into 4 Gigs Ram soon.
Mac is already there at 8 Gigs if I stand correct.

Alan Russell

christianb

12-04-2003, 09:42 AM

Hey Patrick,
If it weren\'t for the sincerity of your posts I would have thought for sure, based on the title, that you were sent by the DOF (Department of Flamers...internet, not the other kind... images/icons/wink.gif )
The one thing you do mention in both posts is Logic, which as we know, will only progress for osx and macs (unfortunate). I can say that Logic is rock solid in osx and the EXS sampler, while not as bell and whistley as the newer Kontakt and Mach5 samplers is equally solid in Logic. While I often envy the sampler developments being made by other companies I am hopeful that EXS will also get a face lift in time. (Although it is my understanding that many of the top developer dogs have jumped ship at emapple images/icons/frown.gif )
At the end of the day it depends on what sequencer you are in love with most. You have Logic... why not install it and take it for a spin?
I just got a dual G5 and couldn\'t be happier

cb

ed buller

12-04-2003, 10:57 AM

I have been using both platforms now a few years and my view is . PC\'s are cheap and chearful. Macs are sexy and expensive.

ed

Patthoven

12-04-2003, 02:28 PM

Yeah, I just have a hard time with stepping back into my Mac. Maybe its all the stuff I hear here. But alot of guys are doing OK I guess.

If I should take the leap back in, what OS(X) is most stable for Logic? images/icons/grin.gif

Scott Cairns

12-04-2003, 05:19 PM

Mac vs PC? Boy did you open a can of worms! images/icons/smile.gif

Both Mac OSX and Windows NT operating systems are built on Unix architecture so the stability is much better for both these days.

I could go on for pages about the good and bad points of both systems (I\'ve worked with both for years) but wont bore you!

One thing I would check if you are thinking of going Mac (particularly OSX) is what plug-ins and software it supports. I havent used Macs for audio so check with some folk here. I seem to of read a few times about people sticking with OS9 cause they are waiting for OSX support or something... images/icons/frown.gif

I will go out on a limb and say that you can build a high end PC cheaper than buying a Mac, but if you dont know what components to buy and what works in harmony with the other, you could have problems.

If you really know what to shoot for you can build a high end PC VERY cheap these days.

Then there are places like TRUESPEC that will offer custom DAWS to take the guessing out of it for you. Don\'t know what the prices are like.

Scott Cairns

12-04-2003, 05:21 PM

Actually, since you are posting this in the Kontakt forum, were you asking specifically in relation to running Kontakt? Or in general?

His Frogness

12-04-2003, 07:19 PM

I will say that the most rewarding DAWs I worked with were G4 Pro Tools rigs. Though they were in the neighborhood of $30,000 (if I remember correctly). It could also be because they were in a nice studio and that\'s why they seemed so nice. If you\'re into audio editing, I\'ve heard Spark XL is a great audio editing prog (but Sony\'s Sound Forge 7 seems to be almost catching up so that may not be the case). What was great about the Poro Tools rig is that it was stable....very stable.

For every other possible issue I can\'t see how a mac compares to a PC. You have a world of options to get the exact kind of set up you\'re looking for with a PC. They\'re flexible, they\'re cheap, they\'re faster, they\'re just not as reliable.

*hides under table and awaits the onslaught*

dcornutt

12-04-2003, 07:24 PM

Just fyi, Windows (NT, 2k, XP) is not built on unix.

dnortana

12-04-2003, 07:30 PM

No onslaught from this direction, your Frogness.

I used to be a Mac only guy. Then got a PC for GigaStudio - more stable than my mac. Now with the recent stampede of OS changes on the Mac, with developers struggling to get buggy code running, I\'m finding \'The Dark Side\' is winning me over more strongly. images/icons/wink.gif

I just built a fairly state of the art home built PC for under 1/3 the price of a state of the art Mac. Running Kontakt, it outperforms my Mac by something approaching 2 to 1 (Athlon 2800+ versus a Mac Dual Gig G4). It doesn\'t crash - I used to be able to say that about my mac. Times are a changin\'.

Trond

Nick Batzdorf

12-04-2003, 08:08 PM

I own Logic 6.31 Platinum but have never installed it on my Mac because i hear about all of the massive problems that Mac guys are encountering. What problems? They\'re on 6.32 for OS X, if that\'s what you\'re talking about, but I use 6.31 on my G4 in OS 9.2.2 every day.

Some of the NI stuff I\'ve tried isn\'t crazy about it (especially Kompakt when it\'s streaming), but everything else works great. I can\'t imagine what massive problems you\'re talking about.

Scott Cairns

12-04-2003, 08:32 PM

Just fyi, Windows (NT, 2k, XP) is not built on unix. Yes your right, not built on Unix (my mistake) but they had one of the Unix guru\'s (I forget his name) come in and help design the whole NT technology. I have it in an NT engineering doc at home somewhere.

dcornutt

12-04-2003, 11:56 PM

Here\'s a good overview of NT history.

http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494 (\"http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494\")

Jaimo

12-05-2003, 12:14 PM

I\'ll just say that I\'m running Logic 6.3 (still mostly in OS9.2) on a single 450Mhz G4, and it\'s extremely stable. Even though by today\'s standards, it\'s a slow machine.

I think that we\'re almost to the point where Logic and the G5 will be the serious contender, but Apple will have to prove their commitment to wanting to be a major player in the audio industry. Their acquisition of Logic, I believe, was a step in that direction. Obviously, time will tell.

I will say that the improvements made to Logic since Apple\'s resources have been available to Emagic, have been excellent. I really like Logic, so staying with a mac is what obviously makes sense for me personally.

I also think that right now, choosing between a PC or a Mac is really only based on what your software preferences are, and what you need to accomplish on any given day. They both work extremely well, especially considering where things were 5 years ago. And don\'t even get me thinking about what we were all using 10 or 11 years ago...!

robgb

12-05-2003, 12:28 PM

I\'ve used both and like both. But I lean toward PC\'s. First, they\'re easy and cheap to build. You don\'t hear about too many people building Macs.

Second, there\'s more software available for PC. I use Vegas 4 religously and there\'s no Mac version. I also use NI products and have heard -- although I can\'t confirm -- that there are problems with NI and Mac. And, of course, no gigastudio for Mac (if you\'re still using GS).

Third, Windows XP is solid as a rock. My friend\'s OSX box is constantly crashing. Maybe it\'s HIS fault, but supposedly Macs are more user-friendly...

Anyway, PC gets my vote.

Hasen

12-05-2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
I\'ve used both and like both. But I lean toward PC\'s. First, they\'re easy and cheap to build. You don\'t hear about too many people building Macs.
You don\'t hear about too many people building their own cars either. graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

Second, there\'s more software available for PC. I use Vegas 4 religously and there\'s no Mac version. I also use NI products and have heard -- although I can\'t confirm -- that there are problems with NI and Mac. And, of course, no gigastudio for Mac (if you\'re still using GS).
There\'s more sequencing options available for the Mac and I really don\'t think anyone is bothered that they can\'t use the ancient Gigastudio.

Third, Windows XP is solid as a rock. My friend\'s OSX box is constantly crashing. Constantly crashing?? Did you just make that up or what? If his computer is really crashing on OS X then there is something seriously wrong with it. OS X simply never, ever crashes.

robgb

12-05-2003, 07:10 PM

I can only tell you what my friend has told me. His OSX system constantly crashes. Maybe it\'s him or his particular computer, but he\'s always got problems.

The only sequencing choices with OSX are what? Logic. Cubase. Pro Tools?

With the PC you have Sonar, Cubase, Nuendo, and an earlier version of Logic. Plus you get the added bonus of Vegas 4, which is not only THE best video editor available, but also has the Sonic Foundry sound capabilities -- which are superb.

Plus all of the NI products seem to run better on PCs. I\'m sorry, I DO like them both -- really -- but the days of Mac superiority are LONG gone.

Plus, Mac users are basically a club. PC users have an entire society. In some ways that\'s not necessarily a good thing. But when you need help it sure is.

Edit: Also, people who DO build their own cars, build them with great care, choosing only the right components to suit them. The same is true of PC builders. My box is custom built, by me, and rock solid because of it.

dcornutt

12-05-2003, 07:33 PM

I think the notion that OS revisions break things assumes that the product worked properly under the previous OS revision. Some products/software, don\'t work properly under ANY OsX revision. I find it hard to blame the OS for that. Any developer can release under any given OS revision that they have tested under as a system requirement. As long as it works properly, if you happen to hit an OS upgrade revision later that frags it, you simply go back to the previous OS revision and things work again.

Patthoven

12-05-2003, 11:39 PM

Originally posted by dnortana:
No onslaught from this direction, your Frogness.

I used to be a Mac only guy. Then got a PC for GigaStudio - more stable than my mac. Now with the recent stampede of OS changes on the Mac, with developers struggling to get buggy code running, I\'m finding \'The Dark Side\' is winning me over more strongly. images/icons/wink.gif

I just built a fairly state of the art home built PC for under 1/3 the price of a state of the art Mac. Running Kontakt, it outperforms my Mac by something approaching 2 to 1 (Athlon 2800+ versus a Mac Dual Gig G4). It doesn\'t crash - I used to be able to say that about my mac. Times are a changin\'.

Trond Yeah, I have just about the exact same situation. This is what I\'m looking for comments on. Did I just get lucky? or is this really the deal. Cause the results I\'m getting out of my PC gear today far exceed that which I ever squeezed out of my Mac, albeit 3-4 years ago. images/icons/grin.gif

Patthoven

12-05-2003, 11:54 PM

Originally posted by Nick Batzdorf:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I own Logic 6.31 Platinum but have never installed it on my Mac because i hear about all of the massive problems that Mac guys are encountering. What problems? They\'re on 6.32 for OS X, if that\'s what you\'re talking about, but I use 6.31 on my G4 in OS 9.2.2 every day.

Some of the NI stuff I\'ve tried isn\'t crazy about it (especially Kompakt when it\'s streaming), but everything else works great. I can\'t imagine what massive problems you\'re talking about. <hr /></blockquote>Well I am referring to the whole OSX deal.

I know that lots of guys are still using 9.2.2.

In fact , its my understanding that most of the Pros are still using 9.2.2, and not OSX.

But support for OS9 is going to go away and people are going to have to make the leap into OSX.

But if OSX doesn\'t play nicely with all of the new apps and plugs, what\'s the point of having this wonderful new OS based on UNIX. Same (or new)problems, different OS.

Working in an environment like that is absolutely draining. When what little creativity I have, comes to the surface, I can\'t be troubleshooting glitches that much of the time.

I did that with Pro Tools back in the NUBUS days. No thanks.

So I am referring to OSX, because this is the direction things are heading. I just am having a really hard time putting my arms around the things that I hear all the time with various apps. And i get down on my knees, turn on my black light, and chant, Thank you God....That\'s all.

We are agreed that Logic 6.32 and OS 9.2.2 seem to play together pretty well..... But thats today...

My investments today have to be bankable in terms of compatibility tomorrow.

Food for thought images/icons/grin.gif

Owel

12-05-2003, 11:59 PM

I think there\'s an \"air of arrogance\" around Mac users, they defend their platform and will fight to the end, (thus the term Mac zealots), and think they\'re better than anybody, or they\'re more artistic and therefore deserve a special Mac computer.....

So I went out and bought a PowerMac G4 with the Cinema display and all that. images/icons/smile.gif Now, I\'m part of the IN crowd.

Well, I still find myself going back to the PC to do my work stuff. I\'m so used to the tools on the PC side, it\'s hard for me to switch gears and work on the Mac. And oh yeah, some of my important tools run on the PC only, like SQL Enterprise Manager, PC Anywhere, Windows Media Encoder, Outlook 2000 (Mac Entourage is a joke/toy).

On the other hand, Windows just got their act together with the release of Windows 2000 and XP. Before that, I absolutely *hated* Windows 98. I\'m crashing 5 to 10x a day, or even more. No wonder the early comments that Macs are stable surfaced... it\'s all the fault of Win3.1, 95, Win98!

Today, I think we got the best of both worlds.

Scott Cairns

12-06-2003, 04:10 AM

Here\'s a good overview of NT history.

http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494 (\"http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494\") Well I cant see any mention of a \"Unix guru\" in there. Perhaps my remembrance of the facts are skewed. images/icons/smile.gif

Thanks for posting the link.

Scott Cairns

12-06-2003, 04:15 AM

I have to say that it\'s good to see everyone remaining civil about this topic. images/icons/smile.gif

There\'s nothing like a \"PC Vs Mac\" debate to get peoples blood boiling and hurling insults at each other.

Personally, I like the level of control and customisation I can achieve with a PC.

But I still think the Mac GUI and the general usability of the machine wins hands down. images/icons/tongue.gif

Hasen

12-06-2003, 05:00 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
I can only tell you what my friend has told me. His OSX system constantly crashes. Maybe it\'s him or his particular computer, but he\'s always got problems.
It simply must be!

The only sequencing choices with OSX are what? Logic. Cubase. Pro Tools?

With the PC you have Sonar, Cubase, Nuendo, and an earlier version of Logic. Plus you get the added bonus of Vegas 4, which is not only THE best video editor available, but also has the Sonic Foundry sound capabilities -- which are superb.
On the Mac you have Logic, Cubase, Nuendo, Pro Tools and Digital Performer. The only thing you have on the pc that is not on the Mac is Sonar and Vegas. Is Vegas even a sequencer though?

I\'m not saying Mac is better than pc, they both have their pros and cons.

12-06-2003, 05:43 AM

For a long time now I\'ve used both. I buy my systems specially made and tested for me because I like the feeling of unwrapping it all, plugging it in and just getting on with making music. I\'m not a fan of building my own, not because I can\'t but because I like others to spend their time tinkering with the machines to get them ship-shape.

As a consequence, I\'ve rarely had trouble with any of them. The actual hardware has been pretty much exemplary so I\'ve relly come to believe the debate as to which is better is futile.

If it works, its good. If it doesn\'t then its best left to those in the know to fix it because they\'re evidently going to do a better job of it.

robgb

12-06-2003, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by Hasen:
The only thing you have on the pc that is not on the Mac is Sonar and Vegas. Is Vegas even a sequencer though?
EDIT: I read the above sentence wrong. So disregard whatever you need to.

On PC you also have Cubase, Nuendo, an earlier version of Logic as well as Sonar and a lot of smaller, less expensive sequencers. You also have ACID, which is a wonderful program for loops AND sequencing AND multitracking. I\'ve done entire projects in ACID.

And, no, Vegas is not a sequencer. It\'s an extremely powerful multitracker/video editor that blows every other multitracker (or video editor) out of the water. Believe me, I\'ve tried them all.

But you\'re right that PC\'s and Macs both have their pros and cons. Actually, I\'m not sure what the PC\'s cons are -- other than the lack of Logic support -- but I\'m trying to keep it civil here. images/icons/smile.gif

Hasen

12-06-2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by robgb:

On PC you also have Cubase, Nuendo, an earlier version of Logic as well as Sonar and a lot of smaller, less expensive sequencers. You also have ACID, which is a wonderful program for loops AND sequencing AND multitracking. I\'ve done entire projects in ACID.Yeah and you have Apple Soundtrack on the Mac but who cares really? I was just comparing the main Sequencers that everyone uses. So you have DP, Pro Tools and Logic on the Mac and Sonar on the pc. Most who were Logic pc users have either moved over to Mac or SX on the pc. I wouldn\'t want to go on comparing other stuff that is on each platform \'cos we\'d be here forever comparing stuff like Peak and Altiverb.

But you\'re right that PC\'s and Macs both have their pros and cons. Actually, I\'m not sure what the PC\'s cons are -- other than the lack of Logic support -- but I\'m trying to keep it civil here. images/icons/smile.gif Its quite simple really: hardware. Because of the incredible diversity of pcs there can be so many problems that are purely related on the combination of hardware components used to make it up. Whereas Macs are almost like consoles - you just order a certain model from a limited selection and that\'s what you get. So any problems will be much easier to solve and will no doubt be already known.

Obviously inherent in that is the fact that you can\'t mix and match different parts for the supposed ultimate and most powerful combination.

If I buy a G5 then that\'s what I\'m getting. There\'s only three models and all are very similar (certainly the two higher models) whereas a pc could be absolutely anything at all. That\'s the most obvious con for me with pcs without going into comparing OSes and software support.

steve_t

12-06-2003, 10:25 AM

Reason not to get a Mac in Japan:
http://homepage.mac.com/masanorif/iMovieTheater23.html (\"http://homepage.mac.com/masanorif/iMovieTheater23.html\")

graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

robgb

12-06-2003, 12:41 PM

If I buy a G5 then that\'s what I\'m getting. There\'s only three models and all are very similar (certainly the two higher models) whereas a pc could be absolutely anything at all. That\'s the most obvious con for me with pcs without going into comparing OSes and software support.

Which is why I always build my PCs. I handpick the parts I want and put a PC together in about 1 hour. It\'s VERY easy to do. Even for electronics idiots like me.

Then there\'s the question of cost. I built a blazing fast DAW for about $700. If I want to upgrade in the future to say, Athlon 64, it\'s easy as pie.

I don\'t think you\'ll find any G5\'s going for that price, and most people upgrade by buying a new computer... images/icons/smile.gif

Wirebird

12-06-2003, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
I can only tell you what my friend has told me. His OSX system constantly crashes. Maybe it\'s him or his particular computer, but he\'s always got problems.

The only sequencing choices with OSX are what? Logic. Cubase. Pro Tools?

With the PC you have Sonar, Cubase, Nuendo, and an earlier version of Logic. Plus you get the added bonus of Vegas 4, which is not only THE best video editor available, but also has the Sonic Foundry sound capabilities -- which are superb.

Plus all of the NI products seem to run better on PCs. I\'m sorry, I DO like them both -- really -- but the days of Mac superiority are LONG gone.

Plus, Mac users are basically a club. PC users have an entire society. In some ways that\'s not necessarily a good thing. But when you need help it sure is.

Edit: Also, people who DO build their own cars, build them with great care, choosing only the right components to suit them. The same is true of PC builders. My box is custom built, by me, and rock solid because of it. I think you just managed to cover at least a third of the major myths out there... images/icons/wink.gif

Mac OS X is rock steady. Period. Anyone having issues with it is either having issues with a specific application or have no idea what they are doing. Having said that, there\'s at the same time no perfect OS, be it labeled Microsoft, Apple or any other. But OS X comes very, very close to perfection.

The sequencing choices are many. Apart from the ones already mentioned are Nuendo for Mac and Digital Performer. I would say that the options are about as many, perhaps slightly less, but in what way could it matter? You pick a sequencer and then you use that regardless of other choices. There are a lot of powerful apps out there available for both platforms. The only app that you mention that is not available for Mac is Sonar. But here in Europe there seems to be rather few people using Sonar, it has an undeserved rumor of being a an app for the novice. This is of course wrong, but still leaves it being less of an issue here that Sonar is PC only.

Vega 4? Never even heard of it... but video editing is not my main field of work. How does it compare to Final Cut Pro, Avid or Media 100?

Mac users are no more a club than PC users. Actually, as primarily a Mac user I often find PC users teaming up to flame Mac users. There\'s a lot of prejudice out there... Try an online game like Quake (often played by guys of the age 20-30), then mention that you\'re on a Mac and watch the massive negative response...
Among musicians the choice of platform is close to irrelevant. You stick with what you know and what matters most is the application that you use and the OS, a lot more than the hardware. Personally I prefer using whatever gets me where I want to go and it doesn\'t matter if it\'s a PC or a Mac. Both have their strong sides.

All my NI apps run just fine in OS 9 as well as OS X. Stability varies from version to version and the same applies to the PC versions.
You write that \"the days of Mac superiority are LONG gone\". Basically there is no superior platform today. Both Mac and PC high end machines are extremely powerful environments that leaves little to desire, and what it all boils down to is application specific performance and stability. Dig deep and this is what you will find.

Regarding building your own computer, sure it\'s a nice option, but a lot of people prefer driving without having to invent the wheel first. However, customizing a Mac these days is far from the \"locked environment\" that it used to be. There\'s a lot that can be done if one needs to boost performance. Take a look at http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/ (\"http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/\")
I have worked professionally on Macs since -84 (with design) and was making music on Macs when PC\'s where just \"that grey thing at the office\". However, I was glad when the PC entered the arena of making music, because what it meant was that the the few available players got some serious competition. Everything started to get better and cheaper and this is still the general direction of software and hardware for both platforms. Thus we all benefit from both platforms regardless of choice images/icons/smile.gif

Cheers,
Wirebird

Frederick

12-07-2003, 06:59 AM

I have a Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz/OSX/Logic 6.3.2/EXS24MkII and couldn\'t be happier. OSX/Logic is incredibly rock solid - its faster, less likely to crash, more reliable and intuitive by far than my previous G4Dual533/OS9.2.2/DP3.1 w/Kontakt 1.2 system.

By the way, this is being stated by myself as a user who was essentially terrified of both OSX and Logic, although I have worked with Macs extensively in recording studio environments for 4 years. I am SO glad I made the switch.

esteso

12-10-2003, 01:37 AM

Originally posted by Wirebird:

Mac OS X is rock steady. Period. Anyone having issues with it is either having issues with a specific application or have no idea what they are doing. Having said that, there\'s at the same time no perfect OS, be it labeled Microsoft, Apple or any other. But OS X comes very, very close to perfection.

Cheers,
Wirebird Sorry, had to pipe up for this one. I\'m on 10.2.6 and my machine crashes probably once every half hour! I do know what I\'m doing but unfortunately NI does not. I\'d have to say that the OS seemed pretty stable until I tried to add Kontakt and then later GPO (Kontakt player) although I\'d managed to crash it a time or two doing such exotic things as trying to record one mono track with no other tracks playing back or just hitting a button a little too fast for it\'s comfort. It\'s far from stable. This is on a brand new machine, stock, 2GB ram, no internet, no nothing except audio....

I\'ve crashed using DP4 (4.1, 4.11) and Logic 6.3 (6.31, 6.32) although Logic fares far better than DP. I\'ve had freezes that were so hard I had to unplug the computer from the wall. Then I had to physically go into the box to reseat the PCI card so that the computer would recognize it. That happened at least four times.

Repair permissions, fsck-y, ditch prefs, re-install apps, blah, blah...... same old, same old. Newsflash: IT DOESN\'T WORK YET

Now we can discuss who\'s fault this all is and truthfully I don\'t know. There\'s a thread or two over at OSXAudio that quite a few developers have taken part in and even they seem to not agree. And I can\'t follow their arguments anyway. (don\'t know the language) For sure NI is mixed up in the non functioning of their tools in OSX. But DP and Logic aren\'t working so great either. Spectrasonics sorta worked in Logic but it was really hit or miss in DP4. The problem appears to be (maybe I should say, could be) the fact that Apple kept changing the AU spec, the heart of OSX for audio guys. For sure they changed it just after Logic originally came out with the first app for OSX. Later when DP4 was released it was coded with a different spec, thus watering down the vision of a \"universal\" standard for plug ins. The Spectrasonics plug that worked in an earlier OSX version of Logic may or may not have worked in DP4. Last week Spectrasonics released an update that presumably addresses this issue. (PS, I love your stuff Eric....just using you as an example) Hell, maybe Eric will come on over and give us the poop on why the AU spec was changed, how much it was changed and what effect it\'s had on development or stability. (OK, probably not, all these NDA\'s floating around)

I could go on but I won\'t. Apple\'s fault? NI\'s fault? DP\'s fault? Gary\'s fault? My fault?

Who cares? The bottom line is it doesn\'t work. Maybe later but I\'m a little tired of waiting. DP 3 crashed three, four times a day in OS9 (9.1, 9.22) That\'s why I was eager to go to OSX. Then when DP4 crashed every half hour or so I thought I\'d give Logic a twirl. After two months on iLogic
I\'m about ready for a nice PC!

Cheers

Hasen

12-10-2003, 05:16 AM

Every half an hour?? Esteso, there\'s seriously something wrong there. I use my Mac for all kinds of things, sequencing is only on of them and it has still never, ever crashed even once no matter what I\'ve done with it. Get your Mac looked at by an expert is my advice.

Its UNIX for God\'s sake! Protected memory! It couldn\'t crash if you stuck it to the front of your car and drove full speed into a wall! images/icons/wink.gif

esteso

12-10-2003, 10:27 AM

Hasen

Actually last night I did stick it in front of my car and ran over it. You\'re right! The dang thing didn\'t crash. Too bad i need it for audio and not the demolition derby! images/icons/frown.gif

Seriously though, two OS\'s, two midi interfaces, 3 drivers, two audio interfaces, two sequencers, a complete scrapping of my oh so cool SCSI system later...... it still crashes. It used to work great just before I put any programs on it.

I\'ll tell you what though. It got a LOT worse when I tried to integrate Kontakt and GPO into the system. There are some known problems with Motu midi drivers and apparently the 324 driver just won\'t work with OSX, although they have released new ones. 424 driver seems to work but then again it refused to play nicely with my SCSI card. There may or may not be a problem with the Griffin g4 port. It appears to work but then again the system crashes. Is it live or is it Memorex? I don\'t know. My opinion about experts are that, basically, as little as I know about computers I know more than some office tech guy about how computers work with audio software. This is probably not a hardware issue. Apple keeps changing core components of their operating system and developers are forced to rewrite. NI is a perfect example. They have not released a functioning piece for OSX to date. (perhaps Reaktor) Unfortunately they are such a force in the market that it\'s pretty much impossible to work around \'em. (for me)

Well anyway, it\'s a little frustrating. I\'m trying to be a musician. I wish software people would write software that works so I can write music. That\'s all. It took me all of 20 minutes to find 6 or 7 bugs in GPO. 2 of \'em were deal breakers. Apparently Gary thought so too \'cause he withdrew the release until NI could fix it. My point is, how good can these guys be testing their products if I can find this many bugs without even trying? I wonder if I could write music this badly or treat my clients like this and still have a job?

OK, I feel better now. I think I\'ll go practice my chops a little bit. My guitar NEVER crashes! well there was that one night after too much Tequila but I think that was pilot error images/icons/wink.gif

Cheers

dcornutt

12-10-2003, 02:21 PM

If your assertions were right that the spec/AU in OSX is constantly changing and each successive new version breaks the older one, the new plugins, updated with the new AU spec...would no longer work in the older versions of the OS that still were using the old spec. (ie.that was not compatible or somehow different spec than the newer spec). I don\'t think that\'s currently the case..not has it ever been. There are some older AU plugins that \"still\" work today. There are some newer ones..that actually work in older versions of OSX..and there are some that don\'t work in ANY version of OSX as well. (that along with some that work in one app..but not another)

The issue is more centered around \"implimentation\" of the spec.

You are right though, no matter \"what\" the reasons, it still sux for the customers.

I hear apple is implimenting an AU compatibility program to deal with these issues of differeing interperations, etc.
What they are doing is they have a test app for AU compatiblity. If your plugin, etc..doesn\'t pass it...you can\'t call it an AU. You can still sell it, but you can\'t say it\'s AU compatible.

They are trying hard to clean up these issues of differing interperations of it.

Some of these differences in interperation come from a different understanding of AU (as in MOTUs case). Some of the issues are from porting issues from VST format (whcih presents some specific problems/issues because of differences in the formats). And some of it comes from apples side as well (whether that\'s lack of definition in parts of the spec, or changes to AU)

Whatever the reasons, it\' s gonna get straighted out..when apple roles out this new program. But, once everybody gets on the same page, things should go pretty smootly. What it will mean is, no longer will their be an AU plugin that works in one AU spec app..but not another. And, there will be less compatiblity issues in having different 3d party AU plugins in your system.

It\'s all good..and directly benefits \"us\" the end user

robgb

12-10-2003, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by Wirebird:

Vega 4? Never even heard of it... but video editing is not my main field of work. How does it compare to Final Cut Pro, Avid or Media 100?
Blows them all out of the water. I know. I\'ve used them all. Mind you, these are all good applications, but Vegas 4 is special. First to have real-time previewing -- ACTUAL real-time previewing on a television monitor, not your computer screen. But what really sets it apart from any of the other video editing apps is its audio engine. Superb. I rarely edit video and use Vegas 4 almost exclusively for audio.

It used to be made by Sonic Foundry (Sound Forge, Acid) but is now owned by Sony Digital.

Scott Cairns

12-10-2003, 03:39 PM

Vegas 4 is also being used to master a lot of audio these days too.

esteso

12-10-2003, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by dcornutt:
If your assertions were right that the spec/AU in OSX is constantly changing and each successive new version breaks the older one, the new plugins, updated with the new AU spec...would no longer work in the older versions of the OS that still were using the old spec. (ie.that was not compatible or somehow different spec than the newer spec). I don\'t think that\'s currently the case..not has it ever been. There are some older AU plugins that \"still\" work today. There are some newer ones..that actually work in older versions of OSX..and there are some that don\'t work in ANY version of OSX as well. (that along with some that work in one app..but not another)

The issue is more centered around \"implimentation\" of the spec.
This seems to be an issue of semantics and is outside what I can comment on. I don\'t know enough about coding software...... but I will say this; Spectrasonics plugs worked in the original Logic for OSX. That same plug did not work in DP4. That\'s why they updated it last week. Now, presumably, it works in both apps. But before it didn\'t, so obviously something was different. Some plugs loaded up happily in Logic 6.31 but couldn\'t even pass the Audio Units exam that each AU plug must pass in order to be recognized in DP4. All I know is that that is pretty sketchy.

Anyway, I hope you are right and Apple gets it together. I hope that NI gets it together too but in the meantime...........??

BTW is any of this better in Panther?

Regards

Nick Batzdorf

12-10-2003, 06:31 PM

Mac OS X is rock steady. Period. Anyone having issues with it is either having issues with a specific application or have no idea what they are doing. Well, just add \"or both\" and you\'ve covered the gamut!

OS X is new, and music software is very complicated. We\'re running third-party plug-ins inside second-party software, often while streaming in a fourth-party program over ReWire, and in some of our cases streaming the whole shooting match into a sixth-party hardware system (TDM). There\'s gotta be a seventh party somewhere, but you get the idea.

This is going to take time.

Wirebird

12-11-2003, 03:01 AM

Wirebird

12-11-2003, 03:13 AM

Originally posted by esteso:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wirebird:

Mac OS X is rock steady. Period. Anyone having issues with it is either having issues with a specific application or have no idea what they are doing. Having said that, there\'s at the same time no perfect OS, be it labeled Microsoft, Apple or any other. But OS X comes very, very close to perfection.
Sorry, had to pipe up for this one. I\'m on 10.2.6 and my machine crashes probably once every half hour! I do know what I\'m doing but unfortunately NI does not. I\'d have to say that the OS seemed pretty stable until I tried to add Kontakt and then later GPO (Kontakt player) although I\'d managed to crash it a time or two doing such exotic things as trying to record one mono track with no other tracks playing back or just hitting a button a little too fast for it\'s comfort. It\'s far from stable. This is on a brand new machine, stock, 2GB ram, no internet, no nothing except audio....<hr /></blockquote>Like I wrote: \"is either having issues with a specific application\". Any application can crash regardless of OS ability if it\'s not programmed correctly. I\'m truly sorry to hear that you are having issues, but you are jumping to conclusions because of this that says little or nothing about the potential of OS X. Anyone running a basically crash free system, such as myself and thousands of others is a proof of what can be achieved and that there is a foundation for a rock steady performance.

I worked for a year developing Groove Agent for Steinberg (I designed it, so there was no coding involved for me but I got a pretty close look at the procedures). Over the years I\'ve also worked for other companies doing a lot of beta testing of different audio applications. Believe me when I say that the individual stability of each application is close to everything. If not done right, the stability of the rest matters little. Theres only so much that can be done to prevent application specific problems or crashes and many times it\'s more a matter of isolation than prevention. But for the programmers to stay within the boundaries of what is allowed to do in the plethora of possible configurations and sometimes disregarded standards, is sometimes an impossible task and the user needs to know this. A DAW is a very, very complex system be it based on a Mac or a PC. As of today, a computer is not a DAW (except for some systems), it\'s a system designed to perform just about everything that can be done with a computer. Because of this, you have to choose and match your hardware and software very carefully. You have to keep things in mind such as NOT upgrading to the latest version of OS X until you know for sure that it works as good as your current setup, and the same thing goes for software and drivers.

There are rarely any out of the box solutions except the lucky ones that happen to get it all matched right from the start. But can a Mac running OS X be the close to a perfect environment for a DAW meeting high demands, close to crash free day in and day out? Yes definetely. Also, I\'m talking about today and not with the technology of tomorrow.
But it\'s not necessarily an easy task, and your issues is the proof of that. Perhaps the PC platform would serve you better, but the question to ask is perhaps more in the line of: What do you need to do, what do you need to be able to do this, and what setup could match those demands? Once you\'re there with the equipment, stay there and don\'t upgrade unless you really have to. Every time you do, you will add to the possibilities of instability.
Macs have a slight advantage in the sense that their individual configuration is more fixed and known, whereas a PC have more options available that needs to be covered. It all boils down to standards, but not every manufacturer stick to these standards. Still, there\'s a lot of knowledge out there regarding what works and what does not.

I hope I\'m not giving the wrong impression here, it\'s really not about stating something like \"Macs are perfect this and that.\" What I\'m trying to say is that the close to perfect environment can be achieved with the technology of today, be it Mac or PC. Unfortunately it takes longer to achieve for some, partly because the industry is reluctant to inform the users of all the potential hazards. They have to be, otherwise they would not sell. Imagine a sticker stating \"This will probably work!\" Also, they do not know of all the potential hazards because there is no way for them to know this, unless they had every possible combination of a DAW setup available for testing, which of course would be an impossible task. \"Does this app work as expected on that computer with this special configuration of hardware at the same as you open this other app and click on button C?\" You get the idea...

Regarding Kontakt, yes it does crash on OS X. My impression of that is that they simply needed to get it out asap. I chose to do the uppgrade anyway, because I\'d rather have my sampler of choice in OS X than no sampler at all. But hopefully they sort it out soon.

Cheers,
Wirebird

Nick Batzdorf

12-11-2003, 10:14 AM

Let\'s pretend I\'m a petulant child - just for a minute. images/icons/wink.gif

If I can run Panther and have problems or 9.2.2 and not have problems running music production software, am I wrong to blame Panther?

I haven\'t heard anyone say that OS X isn\'t really well designed or that it doesn\'t have a lot of potential. But how does that prevent it from being a huge pain in my arse *today*?

That\'s what your argument is up against, Wirebird. Whether the problems are due to the OS or the apps doesn\'t matter while you\'re trying to write music.

Now, I have a deep appreciation for the fact that lots of really brilliant people are dedicating their lives to sorting these problems out. But users don\'t generally think that way in the heat of battle!

esteso

12-11-2003, 03:10 PM

Wirebird

I appreciate wher you\'re coming from but from a pratical standpoint I\'d have to stand over in Nick\'s camp. It really just comes down to does it work or not. For you apparently it does work so that\'s great, for me the news isn\'t so good.

OSX is not ready for prime time. NI is not ready for OSX. A lot of smart people making money in the music business in some fashion or other have elected to stay in OS9 for a while and there\'s a good reason for this. A person who doesn\'t rely on his rig to make a living has a lot more latitude in choosing how to proceed. I haven\'t written a note of music in a couple of weeks because I thought I\'d try to cobble some OSX apps together. I have seen the light and this morning, after thanking the Gods that I had the foresight to buy a dual boot machine, booted up in OS9 and am back to work.

So that\'s that. I like X (at least the idea of it) and in a few months and after a lot of good reports with my specific apps I\'ll try it again.

As a side note I\'d have to say I agree with Bruce that these days, by using Macs only, you\'re only limiting yourself. I\'m a stone cold Mac guy but I just can\'t ignore the facts anymore. (sorry Bruce, if I have paraphrased this differently to meet my nefarious purpose!)

What else? Oh yes, it would be a big help if developers, etc. told the truth about what a product will and won\'t do and what it is or is not compatible with. But my prediction is that that day will never come. I could write a book.

Best Wishes

Edi

12-11-2003, 03:20 PM

i have used only MACs from the time when desktop computing started. nevertheless, I do agree with Bruce that for a number of years now the issue of hardware and operating system platform is hardly of importance.

Since there seems to be interest in the causes of the religious war, perhaps my perspective on it will be of some interest:

Basically this is a David and Goliath story. You must go back to the 1980\'s when desktop computing was beginning to really expand. The Apple software at the time provided user-friendliness such as had never been seen in computing before. Remember that the PC competition was not Windows but DOS. There really was no comparison. The Goliath of the story was IBM which had dominated corporate computing for decades through the mainframe business. When IBM went into the desktop business it was able to use its nationwide sales force to powerful advantage in the corporate market . Apple had no chance. Apple had been successful in academia and later in the arts. Among the kinds of people who loved maverick products such as UNIX and Apple, IBM was the unfairly advantaged Goliath. You can imagine the ire they felt as this inferior product took almost the entire corporate market while Apple survival became very iffy. Ironically, IBM dropped the ball by underestimating the importance of desktop computing and dinosaur-like came close to going under...but thats another story. Microsoft as we all know became the winner by essentially being able to charge a tariff for every PC made, and PC\'s were made by everybody and his brother. Windows eventually shrunk the user-friendliness advantage of the Apple operationg system.

The UNIX story is very similar. Just as the basic ideas that went into the early Apple operating systems were developed at XEROX research center, so UNIX was developed at AT&T\'s Bell Labs, a scientific research facility. There were similar religious wars about that. And just as the XEROX/Apple ideas eventually made it into the PC operating system through Windows, we now see that XP for PC and OSX for MAC are both UNIX-based systems.

Amen,

Ed

As an afterthought you might consider that these advances and the INTERNET were all made possible by heavy government research spending. Those days have long gone...

robgb

12-11-2003, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

I have never seen a man\'s religion so visibly and completely shaken. LOL. I can just imagine the experience -- thanks for sharing. images/icons/smile.gif I always get a kick out of it when true believers scoff at Vegas as if it\'s some kind of toy. Amazing how they\'re willing to let their ignorance make life more difficult for them.

By the way, has there ever been a BAD Sonic Foundry app? Hope Sony does them justice.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-11-2003, 04:26 PM

Re: Sony doing the former Sonic Foundry apps justice...I think it is a very happy marriage.

Hasen

12-11-2003, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Just this week, I converted another Final Cut . He has been complaining for so long about things he\'s having problems with, yet he would never come over and check out Vegas. Right up to the minute I sat him down he was complaining about PCs and how PC software sucks, blah, blah, blah.

I threw four clips into Vegas, trimmed them up into a dozen pieces, slammed them onto an A/B roll with automatic crossfades and started the realtime playback. It was hilarious. The guy literally stopped his yammering in mid-sentance, and said, \"How did you do that? Do that again!!\"

I have never seen a man\'s religion so visibly and completely shaken. That\'s why this age old debate is so pointless. There\'s a million stories as you probably well know telling the exact opposite to your little tale.

Besides, Vegas is for video isn\'t it? How did we even get onto that?? Perhaps not that greatest example in this situation.

Scott Cairns

12-11-2003, 05:37 PM

Besides, Vegas is for video isn\'t it? How did we even get onto that?? Perhaps not that greatest example in this situation.
Actually Vegas is pretty revered for audio too. As I stated earlier in this thread, there are engineers using this app to master albums these days.

It is an excellent Sound Designers tool and mixing app too.

Nick Batzdorf

12-11-2003, 05:44 PM

I have no idea why the Macintosh computer becomes such a frigging religion to some people. 1. Because Jerry Garcia is dead. (What did the Dead head say when he ran out of pot? \"Hey, this music sucks!\" [Sorry if that\'s an old one...])

2. Because until maybe six years ago, Windows was a big pain in the butt and Macs weren\'t.

Windows computers were total loser computers at that time. Things have certainly changed, but I remember the early days of audio on PCs. A company sent me a fully-loaded computer to review their hardware; all I had to do was install a sequencer. OH MY GOD. It took hours upon hours, after which time it turned out that the clock had to be set to the right time zone for the installer to work. I swore that would be the last time I agreed to do anything with a Windows machine.

Meanwhile, the only company making audio hardware for Macs was Digidesign, which meant that there was only one boss. That wasn\'t good if you\'re a consumer who likes competition, but it was good for stability.

3. Because while #2 was going on, Macs had this overwhelming sense of fun about them that contrasted sharply with Windows machines.

4. Because people don\'t want to have to deal with learning another computer that they think is going to take all the fun out of it - even if that\'s outdated thinking (and it is).

5. Because people need a ****ing life. Humans are just weird, which among other things makes them highly susceptible to marketing tactics that prey upon the herd instinct.

http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,61513,00.html (\"http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,61513,00.html\")

It took ten minutes to get to the end of the line of people waiting to get inside a freaking store! Oy ****ing veh!

I could go on, but I have to add that in my case, I like working on Macs \"just because\" I like working on them. But it\'s not a religious thing.

Nick Batzdorf

12-11-2003, 05:51 PM

By the way, one of the things that makes Mac/PC debates so anachronistic is that we\'re living in the age of Multiple Computers in the Studio. Everyone on this board knows that, but not everyone else does.

David Abraham

12-11-2003, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by Scott Cairns:
[QUOTE] but they had one of the Unix guru\'s (I forget his name) come in and help design the whole NT technology. I have it in an NT engineering doc at home somewhere. Dave Cutler? actually from DEC (VMS) and Jim Allchin? from Banyan....

esteso

12-11-2003, 07:32 PM

Hey Nick, In the line about the deadhead isn\'t it \"acid\"? Deadheads only used pot to mellow out after more \"interesting\" activities. (not that I know anything about it first hand, of course)

Cheers

Scott Cairns

12-11-2003, 08:01 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Scott Cairns:
[QUOTE] but they had one of the Unix guru\'s (I forget his name) come in and help design the whole NT technology. I have it in an NT engineering doc at home somewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Cutler? actually from DEC (VMS) and Jim Allchin? from Banyan....David I cant remember! I cant even find the doc now. A company I used to contract to would give it out to their staff training for their MCSE\'s etc.

robgb

12-11-2003, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by Hasen:
That\'s why this age old debate is so pointless. There\'s a million stories as you probably well know telling the exact opposite to your little tale.Actually, I doubt it. You will find very few, if any, Vegas users who migrate to Final Cut Pro (or Avid or Premiere Pro or Media 100 or whatever) and have the same reaction. That\'s how good Vegas is.

Besides, Vegas is for video isn\'t it? How did we even get onto that?? Perhaps not that greatest example in this situation. Actually, it\'s a perfect example. Yes, Vegas is a video app -- but as I tried to point out, it is an incredible multitracking audio studio as well, with excellent plug-ins, including Acoustic Mirror. Like I said before, I use it almost exclusively for audio.

Nick Batzdorf

12-11-2003, 10:49 PM

Hey Nick, In the line about the deadhead isn\'t it \"acid\"? Deadheads only used pot to mellow out after more \"interesting\" activities.Pot has the \"like, whoa, maaaan\" factor that makes it funnier. I like the joke better that way.

(not that I know anything about it first hand, of course) I do, and all too well, having been a teenager in the \'70s. But that was a while ago!

Bruce A. Richardson

12-11-2003, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wirebird:

Vegas 4? Never even heard of it... but video editing is not my main field of work. How does it compare to Final Cut Pro, Avid or Media 100?
Blows them all out of the water. I know. I\'ve used them all. Mind you, these are all good applications, but Vegas 4 is special. First to have real-time previewing -- ACTUAL real-time previewing on a television monitor, not your computer screen. But what really sets it apart from any of the other video editing apps is its audio engine. Superb. I rarely edit video and use Vegas 4 almost exclusively for audio.

It used to be made by Sonic Foundry (Sound Forge, Acid) but is now owned by Sony Digital. <hr /></blockquote>Just this week, I converted another Final Cut . He has been complaining for so long about things he\'s having problems with, yet he would never come over and check out Vegas. Right up to the minute I sat him down he was complaining about PCs and how PC software sucks, blah, blah, blah.

I threw four clips into Vegas, trimmed them up into a dozen pieces, slammed them onto an A/B roll with automatic crossfades and started the realtime playback. It was hilarious. The guy literally stopped his yammering in mid-sentance, and said, \"How did you do that? Do that again!!\"

I have never seen a man\'s religion so visibly and completely shaken. I have no idea why the Macintosh computer becomes such a frigging religion to some people. I\'m not just talking about preference, or about like and dislike, but the kind of rabid fervor that in other circles finds people flying airplanes into buildings. I have rarely seen a person who works on PCs have the same kind of attitude. I landed on PCs merely because the software I wanted to use at the time was PC-based. I was on a Mac until that point, and on IIe before that.

Whatever the weirdness of that phenomenon, this guy was as dyed-in-the-wool Final Cut user as any I have ever known, and he is still crushed to realize how hard he is working to get the same results I get in Vegas with almost no effort. He started listing all the great new features in the latest Final Cut, and I kept saying, \"Oh, you mean like this?\" and showing him those same features in Vegas. I have to admit I was rubbing it in hard, but this guy has given me total crap about working in \"toy software\" for a long time, and I was really happy to show him what was what.

Then, he started talking about Soundtrack, like it was some sort of amazing Apple invention!! It was almost like poetry, me pulling up ACID and filling him in on the fact that Apple had hired Chris Moulios years after the fact to do the lesser version of his technology that\'s been around since 1998 on PCs.

God, I loved that day. One of my best Mac-deflations ever. Not that I don\'t think Macs are OK, but the Mac-advantage in audio/video technology is really pretty much a throwback to a lot of years gone by. People should just work with the software they want to work with, and get over the platform. In the end, it\'s just a whiny box that knows the difference between 1 and 0, no matter whose logo is on it.

Daedalus

12-12-2003, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Scott Cairns:
Both Mac OSX and Windows NT operating systems are built on Unix architecture so the stability is much better for both these days. I though the Windows operating systems were built on the Macintosh architecture. images/icons/grin.gif

This thread is way too long. I thought I\'ld add a little humour.

Wirebird

12-12-2003, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by Nick Batzdorf:
If I can run Panther and have problems or 9.2.2 and not have problems running music production software, am I wrong to blame Panther?Yes and no. The applications that you use have little in common because they are each coded for a different OS. In a sense it would be wrong to blame the OS because it provides a standard that the applications have to follow. If they don\'t, the stability of the OS is less relevant and thus your scenario could very well be getting problems using applications that are not coded properly for a particular environment. The following is overly simplified but think of and OS as a set of rules: This is what you are allowed to do. Once the rules are bent or broken you\'re on your own. However, the rules are often changed and setting the rules is a task of its own. So the important thing to keep in mind here is the order of things, thus the question would be what you are doing with Panther in the first place? It\'s the latest OS X release that application updates are just starting to catch up with. I\'m not running Panther. I won\'t touch it until absolutely necessary.

Back in the days of Mac OS 7, 8 and 9 Apple had an unofficial policy that when stability was important you should never update a system with a .0 release. This release was always rushed for various reasons and the \"real\" release, the tested and proven one was the .1 release.
In short, this is still applicable.

Originally posted by Nick Batzdorf:
I haven\'t heard anyone say that OS X isn\'t really well designed or that it doesn\'t have a lot of potential. But how does that prevent it from being a huge pain in my arse *today*?

That\'s what your argument is up against, Wirebird. Whether the problems are due to the OS or the apps doesn\'t matter while you\'re trying to write music.

Now, I have a deep appreciation for the fact that lots of really brilliant people are dedicating their lives to sorting these problems out. But users don\'t generally think that way in the heat of battle! I think you\'re missing my point. In essence what I\'m trying to say is the following:
Stating that OS X is not rock steady because of application or user specific issues is wrong. No OS is more stable than the application that you are running in it. The difference in a nutshell is how application anomalies are handled by the OS.
This however has little or nothing to do with solving actual issues, it was only a matter of correcting the statement as such. I could put it like this: \"If a car is blue and green, then is it blue or green?\"

If a user is having problems with their combination of hardware, OS and software the strategy should be the following:
1) Move backwards to the last stable setup, be it an older version of the OS, older versions of applications or drivers or be it even in an older OS (such as OS 9 in the case of OS X).
2) Choose a setup based on another setup that is well known to work as intended.

If OS 9 is the current stable environment for your hardware and software there is no reason to change that. You\'re absolutely right - as the user it doesn\'t matter if it\'s the OS, the application or whatever that is causing the issues, we just want to make music. But because of this, as a user we have our own responsibility to not follow the development of hardware and software blindly.
I waited a long, long time to make the final move to OS X. Although I was using both OS 9 and OS X, I didn\'t make the final move until OS X was beyond OS 9 in terms of stability and workflow in my personal setup with my choice of applications. There\'s no general rule here that applies to everyone. OS X can be a killer OS to work in or it can be a nightmare for anyone having unfortunately chosen the wrong combinations or lack the necessary knowledge to make it all work.

The heat of the battle that you mention, is fuelled by the fact that people are way to eager to change their system. A little update here, a little update there... Now picture yourself a straight line that you start to bend, just a little. It still looks straight from most angles. Then you bend it a little more, and then a little more and suddenly when you forget about the angles and take a couple of steps back you realize that it\'s no longer a straight line but a curve. This is how it often works when things go wrong in a computer based system.
For a programmer this is applied in the sense that fixing a bug sometimes creates another one. Now... if the programmer, with all the knowledge that he possess being the guy on top of things in his department is reluctant to change his code unless absolutely necessary - then what the heck is the user trying to do changing his system just about every second day?

Stick with what works and don\'t touch it unless you know for sure that it\'s going to work, really need the update features or are prepared to deal with occasional issues. Leaving that path is the mother of trouble. Think of your computer based studio as the hardware equivalent of the equipment used back in the days when a studio was all hardware. Now how often did you replace that mixer? images/icons/smile.gif

Regarding the Mac vs PC debate that seems to continue, I think the same applies there. Stick with what works for you and focus on being creative instead.
I think Bruce summed it up pretty well: \"People should just work with the software they want to work with, and get over the platform. In the end, it\'s just a whiny box that knows the difference between 1 and 0, no matter whose logo is on it.\" I would have disagreed about 7 years ago, but today this is simply the case.

Cheers,
Wirebird

Hasen

12-12-2003, 04:24 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hasen:
That\'s why this age old debate is so pointless. There\'s a million stories as you probably well know telling the exact opposite to your little tale.Actually, I doubt it. You will find very few, if any, Vegas users who migrate to Final Cut Pro (or Avid or Premiere Pro or Media 100 or whatever) and have the same reaction. That\'s how good Vegas is.<hr /></blockquote>I wasn\'t referring to video apps in particular, just stories about programs on Mac compared with pc in general. Sequencers for example.

robgb

12-12-2003, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by Daedalus:
[QUOTE]I though the Windows operating systems were built on the Macintosh architecture. images/icons/grin.gif

This thread is way too long. I thought I\'ld add a little humour. Well, we could get into how Apple stole their user interface from Xerox.... images/icons/smile.gif

robgb

12-12-2003, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by Hasen:
I wasn\'t referring to video apps in particular, just stories about programs on Mac compared with pc in general. Sequencers for example. Well, whether you use a Mac or a PC, I\'ve got a new favorite sequencer: Nuendo 2. This app rocks.

Tarkio Road

12-12-2003, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hasen:
That\'s why this age old debate is so pointless. There\'s a million stories as you probably well know telling the exact opposite to your little tale.Actually, I doubt it. You will find very few, if any, Vegas users who migrate to Final Cut Pro (or Avid or Premiere Pro or Media 100 or whatever) and have the same reaction. That\'s how good Vegas is.<hr /></blockquote>Well, I have one of the million stories that tell the opposite. Although we have 28 full-blown Avids where I work, we also have many Final Cut Pro and Avid Express DV Pro installations (yes, using real-time effects and viewing on a TV monitor). All BTW, including the big Avid systems, are running on G4 Macs. The question of whether Vegas users are migrating to FCP or Avid or not is irrelevant. Of the 20 or so pro editors I know, none would be interested in ever leaving their current systems. Maybe it is just a skill-set issue, but FCP and Avids fly under the fingers of a pro. How many post houses are built only around Vegas? But this whole video editing discussion is a waste of time because it is just based on personal bias, including mine and the people I work with. Remember, the plural of anecdote is not \"data.\" images/icons/smile.gif

Scott Cairns said:
\"As I stated earlier in this thread, there are engineers using this app to master albums these days.\"

Scott - I work in high-end video every day, but I\'ve never heard anyone mention Vegas. I would like to learn more about it. Can you post some links or names for the engineers and list a couple of the albums produced with Vegas?

Thanks.

robgb

12-12-2003, 10:37 AM

For more info on Vegas from pros and hobbiests alike, go here:

http://www.dmnforums.com/ (\"http://www.dmnforums.com/\") and click to the Sony Vegas forum.

Also here:

http://www.creativecow.net/index.php?forumid=24 (\"http://www.creativecow.net/index.php?forumid=24\")

You can ask questions of those most familiar with the application. It\'s not surprising that you\'ve never heard of it. It seems to be a very well kept secret. Sony only recently bought out the application, so maybe things will soon change.

Nick Batzdorf

12-12-2003, 01:51 PM

Actually I don\'t think I missed your point, Wirebird, and I agree with everything you\'re saying.

dcornutt

12-12-2003, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by dcornutt:
Just fyi, Windows (NT, 2k, XP) is not built on unix.

Scott Cairns

12-12-2003, 09:38 PM

Scott - I work in high-end video every day, but I\'ve never heard anyone mention Vegas. I would like to learn more about it. Can you post some links or names for the engineers and list a couple of the albums produced with Vegas?Tarkio as far as the video side of Vegas goes I think Bruce could give you solid examples, he has told stories on NS before of video guys making the switch (and I think he has had a hand in some making the switch!)

As far as albums go, I dont have a list of albums I can quote you, here in Australia I have walked into two different mastering suites in the last few months that has had Vegas up on the screen with all the track lists of audio.
One of those studios was in fact run by a guy named Adam, the Australian disctibutor for East West Sounds, (I had stopped by to pick up my copy of QLRI) and he took the time to play me a few tracks from it. And I have heard of more studio\'s around town making the switch. Just here on this board I\'m aware that Bruce, King and Frank Beladino, to name a few, use Vegas in their studios.

Certainly I\'m not aware of any big name albums that have used Vegas (not to say that it hasnt been used either) but I am very much aware that it is becoming a tool in studios more and more.

With its preview to Firewire ability, capturing, support of DXI FX, and video editing options, I think it is a great app for composers too. It can even read and send MMC and be synced to a sequencer.

dcornutt

12-12-2003, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by dcornutt:
Here\'s a good overview of NT history.

http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494 (\"http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494\") I reposted these from earlier in the thread here.

It was originally to be called OS/2 NT (for new technology). This had signfiicance in that MS and IBM were still closely knit at that point. (more on that later). Most importantlly, David Cutler, from Digital and almost his entire engineering team left digital to go to MS and work on this new project (OS/2 NT which was to marry the \"new\" kernel/OS underpinnings with the OS/2 API. The above article points out, that the NT kenel and underpinnings are so closely related to the Digital VMS OS that Cutler had engineered at Digital that one could say they were identical.
So much so, that that point wasnt\' lost on Digital who sued MS and it was settled out of court for some undisclosed amount of money.

Up and to that point, of course, IBM/MS had a very close relationship...from the very beginning when Bill sold IBM the idea of Lic./renting software OS..(something Bill \"did\" actually invent_the concept of Lic software). Bill \"also\" had copped the \"Windows\" GUI from apple, (who had taken the idea from Xerox) and was also sued by apple for that. (also settled out of court). Now, Bill decides to use his new \"innovative\" Windows api with their new \"MS created\" NT underpinnings instead of using OS/2 and call it \"widows NT\" for new technology

IBM continued on with Os/2 which faded from memory. Apple continued on, with periods of innovation, marked by periods of \"marketing\" failures, and for which, MS continually adopted parts of apple innovations going foward and still does today. This is an important point in explaining why things are such as they are. Windows, is a much more viable alternative to a mac today \"because\" in part they copy the more important aspects of things that apple innovates and or comes up with their own propreitary alternatives to others ideas).

Have you seen Longhorn?

dcornutt

12-12-2003, 10:50 PM

To Bruces point: i\'ve heard great things about Vegas. i\'m sure it was satisfiying to at least have someone \"recognize\" the difference when you show it to them. I\'ve had similar opportunities, to do the same thing, sometimes reversed, but even with the differences staring them in the face, they would just say...\"so\"...it\'s still a mac/PC?

Actually, I\'ve heard audio people talking about vegas for years now. Not so many video people. But, most of them were stuck with $$$$ proprietary systems they were still trying to pay off. (probably will be for a while...I\'m talking house mortgage)

Hey, anybody else hear the rumor that apple was in talks with Discreet? Must be for cleaner maybe?

Wirebird

12-13-2003, 07:11 AM

Originally posted by Nick Batzdorf:
Actually I don\'t think I missed your point, Wirebird, and I agree with everything you\'re saying. Apparently I missed the point that you actually got my point so then I to a point did some pointless extra writing images/icons/grin.gif

Wirebird

Nick Batzdorf

12-13-2003, 09:16 AM

The point you didn\'t miss and that I missed you not missing is that I was agreeing with your second post. Another point: I don\'t disagree with the points in your first post, just saying \"Whaddawe care whether the tires don\'t fit the car or the car doesn\'t fit the tires? I need to get to work and the wheels won\'t spin!\"

Wirebird

12-13-2003, 06:06 PM

That is a very good point images/icons/smile.gif

Wirebird

Scott Cairns

12-14-2003, 05:50 PM

Have you seen Longhorn? Yes, saw this a while ago;

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha.asp (\"http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha.asp\")

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_4015.asp (\"http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_4015.asp\")

Apparently it is code-named after a place where the developers go skiing. images/icons/smile.gif

Patthoven

12-15-2003, 10:23 AM

I once was a card carrying member of the \"we Mac guys know what\'s best club\" for years.

But my own experience with PC\'s is only 3 years old.

And at this point, my take on things is that if I can get the application on a PC, I want it on the PC.

Maybe some day as OSX evolves and the developers get their apps and plugs to play nice, making it a solid \"no questions\" investment, I\'ll go that direction again.

But for now I just feel that the \"Dark side\" (PC\'s) is my best bet. images/icons/smile.gif

Patthoven

12-15-2003, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Hasen:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
I\'ve used both and like both. But I lean toward PC\'s. First, they\'re easy and cheap to build. You don\'t hear about too many people building Macs.
You don\'t hear about too many people building their own cars either. graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

Second, there\'s more software available for PC. I use Vegas 4 religously and there\'s no Mac version. I also use NI products and have heard -- although I can\'t confirm -- that there are problems with NI and Mac. And, of course, no gigastudio for Mac (if you\'re still using GS).
There\'s more sequencing options available for the Mac and I really don\'t think anyone is bothered that they can\'t use the ancient Gigastudio.

Third, Windows XP is solid as a rock. My friend\'s OSX box is constantly crashing. Constantly crashing?? Did you just make that up or what? If his computer is really crashing on OS X then there is something seriously wrong with it. OS X simply never, ever crashes. <hr /></blockquote>I have to question your experience here.

1.With the exception of Logic, most all of the serious contenders are dual platform applications.

2.It \"appears\" that the PC platform experiences far fewer conflicts regarding plug-ins etc., and the applications seem to run reasonably smooth, at least for me.

3. Though Gigastudio is being bashed by \"the masses\", there are features about this \"old\" software that many pros refuse to live without. Though Tascam has perhaps made a critical error in customer relations by shutting down their bulletin boards, there seems to be enough information coming from, what \"appears\" to be reliable sources, that there is in fact a version 3.0 on its way out.
If this is indeed true, I am compelled to believe that Tascam will not make the same mistake twice (r.e. releasing a vesion that was too touchy for the masses and then shutting down the bulletin boards to stop the bitching)

Additionally, Tascam would have to be dead from the neck up to take another whack at this thing if they weren\'t serious about it and didn\'t have a few tricks up their sleeve with the new release. Because if 3.0 is no more than a face-lift, they\'ll never be taken seriously again by the people that have been sticking by them.

If on the other hand its a winner with some really great new stuff, there\'s going to be alot of silence on what were some seriously bitchy bulletin boards.

One thing about Giga that I wish I had in Kontakt is Giga\'s Alpha search engine for samples(like the Mac\'s itunes search engine). Talk about a massive time saver!!! I don\'t know how people live without this in the other apps. Its frustrating as hell to me.

So as far as Giga goes,.....I wish them the best, because in the end, we all win.
images/icons/grin.gif

Rich Pell

12-15-2003, 01:32 PM

I`ve got this feeling that GS 3 is going to be fantastic and groundbreaking( as usual). My problem is(and i suspect a few others is) that now most of my NEW libs. are in Kontakt format and they work like a dream. In fact i can do more with my Giga libs.(that succesfully translate) in kontakt than i can in GS . And with extra comps. v-stack and FX teleport,some extra ram..i can`t really tell HUGE a perf. diff.. One thing i can`t live without in Kontakt is the Time machine 2, i find myself NEEDING to use it every week!! Bring on GS 3 , more tools for every one. But Kontakt, used properly ,will always be a primo sampler. Rich

Hasen

12-15-2003, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Patthoven:
I have to question your experience here.

1.With the exception of Logic, most all of the serious contenders are dual platform applications.
Don\'t you mean with the exception of Logic, Digital Performer and Pro Tools? You\'re right that Cubase SX is dual platform. That\'s not plural though...

Sonar is only on the pc. Cakewalk which is made by the same people was available for Mac in an old version but that\'s just like saying Logic in on the pc albeit an old version.

I\'m just repeating myself over and over again in this thread.

Edi

12-16-2003, 01:15 PM

Daedelus.

I know you spoke just for the humor but for completeness:

The windows User Interface is based on MAC.

The windows Operating System is based on Unix, as is that of MAC OSX.

Ed

dcornutt

12-16-2003, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by Edi:
Daedelus.

I know you spoke just for the humor but for completeness:

The windows User Interface is based on MAC.

The windows Operating System is based on Unix, as is that of MAC OSX.

Ed ARgggg.

Windows, NOT Unix Kernel.

Patthoven

12-17-2003, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Rich Pell:
I`ve got this feeling that GS 3 is going to be fantastic and groundbreaking( as usual). My problem is(and i suspect a few others is) that now most of my NEW libs. are in Kontakt format and they work like a dream. In fact i can do more with my Giga libs.(that succesfully translate) in kontakt than i can in GS . And with extra comps. v-stack and FX teleport,some extra ram..i can`t really tell HUGE a perf. diff.. One thing i can`t live without in Kontakt is the Time machine 2, i find myself NEEDING to use it every week!! Bring on GS 3 , more tools for every one. But Kontakt, used properly ,will always be a primo sampler. Rich Hi Rich,

What about key switching and quicksound finder. Do you miss those? I agree with you all the way here..I\'m really itching to get a few more Libraries and I\'m about bustin at the seems to do it, but I\'m just waiting for the Winter NAMM show to see whether this thing is gonna happen soon or not. If so, I still have a preference to keep my libs in Giga for the sake of full giga utilization. But otherwise I will probably port just about everything over to Kontakt. What are you using to do your conversions? Are you happy with them? images/icons/grin.gif

Pat