• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Topic: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    From the Egosys site:

    \"GigaStudio V 2.2 is working with Win98SE/ME not with Win2000.
    Nemesys will release GigaStudio for WInXP this summer.\"

    Can someone confirm me this???


  2. #2

    Re: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    Any voice concerning this long awaited w2k Giga version???

  3. #3

    Re: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    I thought I remembered reading a post on the forum a few weeks back quoting an email from someone from NemeSys. Stating that XP is not in the works. Something to do with Giga needing to get down into the guts of Windows to work properly, and XP isn\'t very friendly to that sort of thing...or something along those lines.

    I\'m probably way off...I think I\'ll have to do a search for the post again myself.


    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by noefx:
    From the Egosys site:

    \"GigaStudio V 2.2 is working with Win98SE/ME not with Win2000.
    Nemesys will release GigaStudio for WInXP this summer.\"

    Can someone confirm me this???

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


  4. #4

    Re: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    I cannot confirm that Nemesys made that statement , but I did read a post stating that Windows XP\'s release date is not this summer but October of this coming fall.

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Chandler, Arizona
    Posts
    4,040

    Re: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    I posted a message from Joe Bibbo of Nemesys regarding that they have been working on the Win 2000/XP version for about a year. You may want to do a search as I posted it a few weeks ago.

  6. #6

    Re: GigaStudio for WInXP this summer

    I found this post relevant to this topic






    Nemesys GigaSampler User Forums
    Software Issues/ Solutions
    Windows XP (2000 upgrade) coming in Oct!

    profile | register | preferences | faq | search

    UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
    Author Topic: Windows XP (2000 upgrade) coming in Oct!
    GigaBeliever2
    Member
    Posts: 38
    Registered: Sep 2000
    posted 05-05-2001 02:36 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \"Windows XP will go on sale in stores Oct. 29, sources familiar with Microsoft\'s product plans told CNET News.com late Friday\"
    Of course that date will most likely be pushed back, but they are trying to meet the christmas PC season to boost sagging profits so it shouldn\'t be pushed back too far.

    Nemesys has been claiming they will have Windows 2000 support when the next version of it, XP, comes out. Let\'s see if they will actually deliver it this time veris the broken \"end of last summer\" promise they made early last year.

    GigaStudio XP on the way!!!!!! Let us take a moment of silence for the death of crappy DOS based Win95/98/ME family...


    IP: 24.18.20.76

    esperlad
    Member
    Posts: 46
    Registered: Mar 2001
    posted 05-07-2001 01:30 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Would it be possible to issue a beta upgrade patch? I have windows XP now in beta 2, but I will not install it until I know that Gigastudio will be compatable.
    IP: 24.124.54.9

    Jamieh
    Member
    Posts: 113
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-08-2001 02:36 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I highly suspect Nemesys won\'t release an XP version until XP has been out for a while.
    IP: 131.107.3.84

    esperlad
    Member
    Posts: 46
    Registered: Mar 2001
    posted 05-08-2001 09:10 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    RATS!
    IP: 24.124.54.9

    Joscci
    Member
    Posts: 8
    Registered: Mar 2001
    posted 05-09-2001 09:04 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I\'m probably wrong, but I thought I read in an article that XP was supposed to \'emulate\' the other Windows 9x/Me Versions.. if so... you think GigaStudio will run under XP?????
    ------------------
    [ Joscci ]
    joscci76@aol.com

    IP: 152.163.205.53

    Haydn
    Member
    Posts: 109
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-09-2001 09:44 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    GigaStudio will have to be written for XP or 2000. These operating systems do not allow programs to access the kernel (ring 0) directly. Gigastudio has low level drivers to allow the streaming of audio from the hard drive. 95/ME programs that stay up in Ring 3 at all times will operate fine. GigaStudio works in both Ring 0 & 3 which is not allowed in XP or 2000.
    IP: 24.177.93.70

    esperlad
    Member
    Posts: 46
    Registered: Mar 2001
    posted 05-10-2001 10:58 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Let us hope that a beta update will be released soon. Someone needs to test it.
    IP: 24.124.54.9

    David Abraham Fenton
    Member
    Posts: 57
    Registered: Jul 1999
    posted 05-13-2001 01:03 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by esperlad:
    Let us hope that a beta update will be released soon. Someone needs to test it.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Giga is a black box solution, not designed to keep up with the latest OS upgrades. The sooner everyone realizes and accepts this the better.

    -david abraham


    IP: 24.7.118.20

    Joris Vincken
    Member
    Posts: 122
    Registered: Jul 1999
    posted 05-13-2001 01:40 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My akai sampler does not support win3.11 yet. Anybody knows where to get an upgrade?
    IP: 213.51.180.147

    GigaBeliever2
    Member
    Posts: 38
    Registered: Sep 2000
    posted 05-14-2001 07:53 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \"Giga is a black box solution, not designed to keep up with the latest OS upgrades. The sooner everyone realizes and accepts this the better.\"
    I would disagree with that. Win98 is a piece of crap OS that is built upon a patched up DOS OS originally written for the very first pc 15 years ago or whatever. Using that OS is painful unless you want to buy a second computer just for GigaStudio.

    Win2000, soon to be WinXP, used to be WinNT, is the fully 32-bit from the ground up MS OS that actually is stable and usable without fear of the blue screen of death.

    Cakewalk has come out with Sonar that includes an DXi interface for real time effects, analog synth emulators, samplers, etc. If Cakewalk can get the latency down to 10ms with a good soundcard using the WDM drivers, why can\'t GigaStudio? I for one would love to have the option of using WDM drivers and having a slightly higher latency if I could then use a real OS that I would rather be booted up in anyway. I refuse to buy a second computer when the one I have now can do GigaStudio, Sonar, real time effects, and direct to disk recording at the same time with no problems while staying 100% digital.

    If I wanted a black box solution, I would buy the hardware version of GigaStudio. WinME\'s days as a supported OS are numbered, Win95 has already been dropped by MS. After October all new Windows computers will come with XP. Nemesys has been saying for years now that they will have Win2k support, this fall they better get XP support or every computer sold will not be GigaStudio compatible.

    My somewhat long 2 cents...

    IP: 24.18.20.76

    rhartman
    Member
    Posts: 7
    Registered: Oct 2000
    posted 05-18-2001 06:02 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
    Giga is a black box solution, not designed to keep up with the latest OS upgrades. The sooner everyone realizes and accepts this the better.
    -david abraham

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    David,

    Your statement is ridiculous. If you check the FAQ www.nemesysmusic.com, you\'ll notice Nemesys has been promising WinNT/Win2000 support since the days when Gigasampler version 1.5 was their latest upgrade. Yet, here we are now at GigaStudio V.2.2, with still no Win2000 support, and with the current OS platforms compatible with Giga software (ie. Win95/98/Me) on the verge of being abandoned by Microsoft in terms of maintenance and support.

    Giga is not a black box solution. It is software, designed to run on a PC platform. If Nemesys wants to build and sell Giga-Boxes/Samplers as stand alone hardware, they can use and stick to whatever STABLE platform they choose. But so long as they continue designing and selling software for the PC, they most certainly are required to keep up with the OS environment, not just because their business depends on it (ie. how many software designers are around today touting software that only works in Windows 2.1?) but also because that\'s the standard they set for themselves when they promised such support (ie. for Win2000, the latest OS at the time) way back when!

    Ryan


    IP: 24.91.202.198

    Haydn
    Member
    Posts: 109
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-18-2001 09:12 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Joe Bibbo posted a response concerning the development of GigaStudio for Windows 2000/XP in the Yahoo GigaStudio forum. It appears they have working on a Windows 2000/XP version for a year now. It looks like they had a big learning curve to use the Microsoft DDK development kit. Hopefully they\'ll get it going by the end of the year.
    IP: 24.177.93.70

    rhartman
    Member
    Posts: 7
    Registered: Oct 2000
    posted 05-19-2001 12:50 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Haydn:
    Joe Bibbo posted a response concerning the development of GigaStudio for Windows 2000/XP in the Yahoo GigaStudio forum. It appears they have working on a Windows 2000/XP version for a year now. It looks like they had a big learning curve to use the Microsoft DDK development kit. Hopefully they\'ll get it going by the end of the year.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That\'s encouraging, and thumbs up if it actually happens.

    An extra thought for those who feel Nememys needs to be given a break on this matter: considering the majority of us resort to building a dedicated PC for Giga in the long run, why does Nemesys insist on devoting itself to the Windows platform? While I look forward to the advantages of a more stable OS being supported, Win2000/XP will not be the end of Microsoft\'s travels along its buggy, bloated, and costly road, and I don\'t look forward to the endless and expensive future upgrades ahead anymore than Nemesys looks forward to rebuilding their software to concur with them. While Linux isn\'t perfect (what OS is?), it\'s current level of stability, robustness, and expandability offer a viable and affordable alternative for all of us with dedicated Giga machines. As it is now, Nemesys has sealed all of our fates.

    Ryan

    IP: 24.91.202.198

    Haydn
    Member
    Posts: 109
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-19-2001 05:15 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Windows 2000 is quite stable being a true 32 bit operating system. As long as programs stay in their place in user mode they do not corrupt other programs. If a program crashes, you can shut it down and restart it without having to reboot the system. I\'m running Windows 2000 Professional and Advanced Server on many machines and they only crashes I have had were caused by bad hardware.
    Linux still has a long ways to go before it will get widespread use. There are many things that still need Xterm (command line interpreter) that remind me of the old DOS days. You\'re average user is looking for an easy to use operating system which probably includes most musicians who want to make music and not worrying about getting their computer to work properly. For example, changing screen resolution on the fly is impossible. Instead you have to go to Xterm and load Xconfigurator and set one resolution up from there. Sometimes Xconfigurator works in the GUI but many times you have to exit the GUI and set it up from a command prompt for it to detect your equipment properly. By the way, I have Linux working on a few machines including ones setup as workstations and servers.

    IP: 24.177.93.70

    rhartman
    Member
    Posts: 7
    Registered: Oct 2000
    posted 05-19-2001 11:40 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Haydn:
    You\'re average user is looking for an easy to use operating system which probably includes most musicians who want to make music and not worrying about getting their computer to work properly.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I absolutely agree, but I think we can also agree that Nemesys has \"inspired\" us to learn much more about our computers, our hardware configurations, system settings, software and OS tweaks, etc., than your average user would ever care to have to know. Writing software for the most widespread platform doesn\'t automatically make it usable by the average user. If Nemesys is aiming to be geared toward the masses, their lack of guidance and sufficient instruction, in written or any other form, for the use of their product doesn\'t show it. As it is, success with their software requires proficient knowledge on the part of the user as both a musician and a computer afficianado. This doesn\'t sound like the average user to me.

    This being the case, why do we have to be locked in Microsoft\'s wirlwind of bug-fix patches released as upgrades, along with their new policy of \'oh, you want support? well, you\'ll just have to upgrade to our new Windows FU.\'? I appreciate your positive experience with Windows 2000, and I do look forward to the day I can run Giga on this (or any other) more stable platform.

    My gripe is: for my dedicated Giga PC, I don\'t need all the bells and wistles (or even some conveniences like changing the resolution of my monitor on the fly) of any Windows platform, and I\'m not looking forward to paying another couple of hundred dollars just for a stable platform. On a dedicated Giga PC, I don\'t want to be subject to future upgrades simply to be eligible for support from Microsoft.

    If Nemesys has taught me anything, it\'s that I\'m no longer in the land of the average user, so I can learn to use a few commands in a command line interpreter if that\'s what it takes. I don\'t have your experience with Linux, but I can\'t imagine the learning curve to be any more challenging than Giga.


    IP: 24.91.202.198

    cc
    Member
    Posts: 72
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-20-2001 11:26 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Methinks you are both missing a subtle point here:
    In the first place, Linux would actually be a perfect solution for a dedicated PC. Since absolutely everything unecessary can be stripped out of the kernel. Except of course for the matter of sound card drivers, which would still present a bit of a problem as things stand.

    However, the usability of Linux is a total non-issue. If one is building a *dedicated* linux PC for Giga, the simplest would be to put an ethernet card on that PC. No screen, no keyboard, no mouse. Simply boot it up.

    All configuration and controlling of Giga takes place via a GUI on your separate sequencer (windows) machine, which then communicates with the Giga engine on the linux machine via the ethernet. I see no problem with this type of solution - one is basically using the dedicated computer as a black box, similar to a hardware sampler, being controlled by midi (albeit in this case with a full GUI running as a windows program, controlling via ethernet).

    As a matter of fact, this would combine very nicely with Nemesys specifying a dedicated hardware platform. I would actually be surprised if something like this is not already in the pipeline.

    PS: Haydn, I don\'t know if I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it is possible to change X resolution on the fly using ctrl+alt+numkeypad+ or ctrl+alt+numkeypad-, provided you have more than one resolution line set up in your X config file.


    IP: 198.54.202.2

    Haydn
    Member
    Posts: 109
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-20-2001 07:46 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks CC for the tip on changing resolution. I have never run across this key combo in any documentation we\'ve been digging through. There are 5 of us using Linux and we\'ve been wondering if there was a shortcut. This is one of the reasons that it may take awhile for companies to port their software to Linux as documentation is hard to find.
    I agree that many musicians have a well above average computer knowledge. I work on computers all day resolving problems. The last thing I want to do is screw around with my home computer. I just want to make music! I\'ve seen this comment many times on this forum.

    IP: 24.177.93.70

    jphardy
    Member
    Posts: 33
    Registered: Jul 1999
    posted 05-21-2001 09:45 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CC wrote:
    \"However, the usability of Linux is a total non-issue. If one is building a *dedicated* linux PC for Giga, the simplest would be to put an ethernet card on that PC. No screen, no keyboard, no mouse. Simply boot it up.\"

    It is quite feasible to run GS on a Win98 dedicated machine without monitor, kbd, mouse (see my posts in the Tips section). Win98 when cut down to minimum size using 98lite boots very quickly. Once a dedicated box is set up, it is going to be very reliable. I have 2 (soon 3) dedicated GS160 PCs. The only gripe I have is the need for a complex workaround to bypass the \"GracefulExit\" dialog that pops up if power to the PC is simply turned off.


    IP: 192.204.130.198

    cc
    Member
    Posts: 72
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-21-2001 01:15 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Indeed it is possible to do that with Win98 as well, but only to a degree.
    Maybe I am a bit biased, but I would just prefer a dedicated \"black box\" Giga to run with a linux kernel. I think the performance would be better. In the first place, one can completely strip out the GUI and all related components, not to mention actually optimizing and compiling your kernel for the instruction set of the system you are actually running.

    And further, all of this could be made to happen automatically with no user intervention. The user need not even know that it is actually a PC under the hood.

    (As an aside, the original cinema DTS decoders were actually disguised PCs doing exactly this type of thing.)

    In addition, linux also has some proven real-time extensions (which is what Giga is all about).

    Also, I would then be able to see for myself that absolutely everything unnecessary has been stripped out - wouldn\'t it be nice if one could dig around inside Win98 to do things like that *g*....

    PS: Haydn, I am sure that the key-combo is documented in one of the HOWTOs?

    The comment about lack of documentation is actually rather interesting. A while back, some magazine voted linux the \"best supported software on the planet\" simply because one can ask almost any question of anybody on numerous forums and newsgroups, and get almost instantaneous response. That is part of what makes the internet great, imho.


    [This message has been edited by cc (edited 05-21-2001).]

    IP: 198.54.202.2

    Jamieh
    Member
    Posts: 113
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-21-2001 02:48 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Windows XP is built on the Win2000 kernel which is incredibly stable. I use nothing but Win2000 at work and I reboot less than once a month. And I usually have about 30 windows open.
    Nemesys would be foolish to move strictly to Linux support. I know that I wouldn\'t even consider running a Linux box, and I know I\'m not the only one who feels this way. I would probably stay on an old version of GigaStudio running Win98 instead of moving to Linux.

    Hopefully XP will be as rock solid as Win2000 is, and Nemesys will get a good version of GigaStudio out for it.

    [This message has been edited by Jamieh (edited 05-21-2001).]

    IP: 131.107.3.84

    Mr. Chance
    Member
    Posts: 38
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-21-2001 11:13 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I\'m w/ Jamieh. I have no desire to hack around w/ Linux. I guess the suggestion is Giga\'s UI would run on the sequencer\'s machine when Giga is a DXi plugin? And the backend would run on Linux? I agree w/ the idea of separating the architecture, I just would rather run the engine on XP.
    I sure agree w/ the need for the Giga UI to run as a DXi plugin -- what nonsense it is having a seperate mixer just for Giga. Screw that, I do my mixing in Cakewalk, Giga just adds complexity to my productions w/ their dedicated mixer and (lame) effects and project files. The beauty of plugins is you open your sequencer\'s project file and boom, all your sampler settings are opened too. And of course being able to process Giga tracks through Waves, Timeworks, Hyperprism, et. al. DX effects instead of Nemesys\' silly proprietary NFX garbage. Unfortunately they seem dedicated to that approach. Ah well, competition is on the way...

    Chance

    IP: 216.41.122.144

    cc
    Member
    Posts: 72
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-22-2001 12:29 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I think you are missing my point.
    Say you have a synth module. You can edit its parameters from your PC using SoundDiver or whatever.

    When you turn on your synth module, you don\'t really care whether it runs RTOS, CMX, VxWare, Linux, or whatever. You don\'t care whether it is a Motorola DSP or an Intel chip inside.

    What I am saying is this: for a dedicated Giga system, ideally you would have a black box with an on/off switch, and MIDI inputs and audio outputs at the back. And an ethernet port to connect it to your sequencer PC.

    You would turn on your black box. On your PC you would have some GUI to control it, load new samples to the sampler, etc.

    So you don\'t really care what OS runs on the sampler, because to you its not a computer. Its a black box, no keyboard or screen, and you don\'t interact with it in the way in which you normally would with a computer.

    For such a dedicated system, linux is the ideal kernel (imho).

    (a) Because it is free - why would you want to pay for using a general purpose OS like XP on a DEDICATED platform?

    (b) Because linux is there already, and can do this thing now already. And because it has real-time extensions with proven track record, which is what the entire Nemesys architecture depends on.

    (c) Because Nemesys can strip out *all* unncessesary *general* functionality from the linux kernel. Its a dedicated system, so all the low level support for graphics, parallel port, serial port, you name it, can be stripped out. This increases performance. Why would you want to pay for an OS if you can get for free one that you can *ensure* will dedicate more CPU cycles to its *dedicated* task - i.e. sample playback? (PS, can\'t we just see people doing this with XP)

    (d) Because of the licensing, nothing stops Nemesys from shipping the linux OS with their package, for people who want to do a wholly dedicated set-up.

    To you, it does not matter that it is linux inside, because you will never see it and never interact with it.

    Just as you are not aware that your television/cable set-top box may actually be a PC running linux. Or that your mobile phone actually may run linux.

    Even though in the gigastudio case, you may still have the freedom of selecting your own hardware and building up your own sampler PC.

    This all started from the comment that Nemesys would be short-sighted to look only to the Microsoft OSs for people doing such dedicated set-ups. Which is completely true. And from a business standpoint, I believe that they would be *extremely* shortsighted (or understaffed) if they don\'t have something like this in the pipeline yet.

    In any case, enough of this seeming linux advocacy. Something like the FreeBSD kernel would probably do just as well. I just keep wondering why for dedicated setups people want to pay money for installing a general purpose OS (in future) when they have something for free which exactly fits the bill and has a proven track record.

    And yes, if you do it this way (irrespective of the Giga OS), you can insert the audio from your sampler into your sequencer using a VST or DXi plug-in, and no, the GUI does not need to run as a plug-in to be able to do this.

    And in this case you can do it as a plug-in simply because Giga is running on the *other* computer, and thus does not need real-time facilities on your sequencer machine.

    Any comments regarding the quality of NFX aside, the point is still that the Giga engine requires real-time performance, and thus kernel-level integration (which is *why* for a dedicated system, it is so attractive to use a kernel like linux which you can actually dig inside and change code if you want); and it is going to be most interesting to see how the competition is going to try and solve that problem without it. It will be do-able in the long run but will require more computing power.

    Plug-ins will come, but will have their downside. It pays to remember that there are technical obstacles to overcome, and if it were actually as easy as many of us believe it to be, *everybody* would have done it already.

    PS: For me, stability is when your machine has an uptime of 78 days before you have to shut it down to install new hardware. TRUE stability is when you have a mail server or cache server, that serves 15 000 users, with an uptime of 768 days (last time I checked).


    [This message has been edited by cc (edited 05-22-2001).]

    IP: 198.54.202.2

    rhartman
    Member
    Posts: 7
    Registered: Oct 2000
    posted 05-22-2001 04:30 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Beautifully put cc!
    And if I may add, Nemesys has spent more than a year recompiling their software to run on Microsoft\'s more stable platform. It makes little sense to have spent so much time and effort mastering Microsoft\'s development kit simply to appease user\'s fear of the unknown. If Nemesys were to shift their focus and efforts over to an open source platform (whether Linux or another) their learning curve could be better invested in optimizing a kernel for Giga themselves, and providing it as ready-to-be-installed so that the user\'s knowledge or lack-there-of would be a non-issue because the leg-work has already been done! The end result would be a stable and optimized platform requiring none (or at least little) of the muss and fuss involved in working around a proprietary OS where the proprietor calls the shots on both the level of code, and the wallet.

    Ryan

    [This message has been edited by rhartman (edited 05-22-2001).]

    IP: 24.91.202.198

    Jamieh
    Member
    Posts: 113
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-22-2001 06:25 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What I am saying is this: for a dedicated Giga system, ideally you would have a black box with an on/off switch, and MIDI inputs and audio outputs at the back. And an ethernet port to connect it to your sequencer PC.
    You would turn on your black box. On your PC you would have some GUI to control it, load new samples to the sampler, etc.

    So you don\'t really care what OS runs on the sampler, because to you its not a computer. Its a black box, no keyboard or screen, and you don\'t interact with it in the way in which you normally would with a computer.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    cc, while I understand what you are saying, I think you are dreaming. No matter WHAT OS you are running on, there isn\'t any such thing as a \'black box\' solution these days. Whether you install Linux of something from Microsoft, it takes quite a bit of digging around to get all of the special Giga hardware and software working.

    Are you suggesting that Giga sell pre-configured boxes that are all set up with Gigastudio and a digital card that you never deal with? I guess that might work. However I don\'t think they can afford to just abandon the people who are going to set their own machines up, and a majority of those people would probably rather set up a system using Microsoft than Linux.

    Plus then there is the whole issue of people that aren\'t using a stand-alone box that almost certainly are going to be on Microsoft.

    The resources it would require to move GigaStudio to Linux would be much *MUCH* better spent on getting a rock solid version of GigaStudio running on XP. If they had that, I doubt there would be a large clamor for a Linux version.

    IP: 131.107.3.84

    cc
    Member
    Posts: 72
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-23-2001 09:12 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No I don\'t think there is any question about \"abandoning\" users on the Microsoft platform, or on moving to a dedicated-only solution.
    Part of the beauty of Gigastudio *is* that it is able to run on general purpose systems, and for this, microsoft support will always be in the picture.

    However, what people must realise is that technological constraints are like taking a baloon and filling it with water: if you push it in with your finger in one place, it will pop out in another.

    It is for this exact reason that Gigastudio is in the form it is, and not a VST or DXi plug-in.

    Sure it can be done as a plug-in, and if you want I will post in a separate thread exactly how it could be implemented as a plug-in. And then people will see that one will have to trade off polyphony, multi-trimbrality, loading time, instrument capacity etc.

    Maybe these things are not going to be important to you or to me, but there will always be the professional segment of the market who will want the utmost performance for the money.

    And thus there will always be a segment of the market who will *not* want to dig around with hardware trying to make it work, and who needs a system like Giga to have obtainable real-time performance.

    No I don\'t think I am dreaming to pick my own pieces, build a PC, and then install a Gigastudio including linux kernel and have it self-configure out of the box - at least on a linux system I can have proper benchmarks run that can tell you upfront where the problems lie.

    That is certainly not something one can get at this stage in the microsoft OS, and it is doubtfull whether one will get it in XP. You certainly cannot get it in NT. A general purpose OS is just simply not *built* specifically for the kind of work that Giga needs done. Which also happens to be the main reason that there are all these issues involved in getting the hardware and software to work.

    I am running Giga on the same machine as my sequencer. This means windows. However, if I wanted to run Giga on a separate PC, I would want it on linux, because I *know* I can squeeze more peformance out of it. Why? Because I, as developer, could dig around inside the kernel.

    This is perhaps best illustrated by some of Joe\'s comments on the official Nemesys group, where he talks about using the DDK and that \"everything Microsoft says and what Nemesys has learnt from using the DDK and reading its documentation, indicates that ... \"

    Well, no matter how good the intention, it is still hear-say until it is *known* - well with linux if it is not known, Nemesys can verify it for themselves in the kernel, and then it *is* known.

    (also consider that one could develop a special linux filing system, optimized for the purpose of streaming gigs).

    Now, I do think that if Nemesys could ship a package that could set itself up right out of the box, (irrespective of the hardware), you would prefer that. And many people will argue that it is more likely to happen with linux, since Nemesys then has more control over the machine.

    I do not really care what direction they go in, all I am saying is that from my own experience, Nemesys would build a rock-solid version of Giga much *faster* on linux than they would on XP. After all, we had real-time DSP running under linux before VST even hit the market.

    I am not suggesting for one moment that resources be diverted from the Microsoft platform to do this. In fact, the linux community itself would probably be more than happy to oblige in the development of a linux port - I myself would get involved if I had the time.

    As I recall, Nemesys were at one stage working on something called the \"supersampler\" which was going to be pretty much a black box system with preconfigured hardware. But with the PC platform, part of the attraction is the fact that you can grow your own, and any solution searched for, had best incorporate that fact.

    It is really all a matter of trade-offs. At the end of the day, it is very attractive to say \"use XP because of its stability\" or \"use Linux because of its proven real-time abilities\" - the fact is that there will still be drawbacks and problems and a better solution somewhere down the road. That is the nature of the beast.

    In any case, there is no use in getting worked up about this, because it is simply a concept. I am sure Nemesys will never abandon Windows users, because it would not be a good business decision. However, if the resources are there, there is no reason why not to pursue both directions. Just as many companies in this business are selling to both Macs and PCs.

    Well, I think I have said basically everything that I can say on this topic. And at the risk of being moderated out of the forum or appearing a fire brand linux preacher (which I am not), I think I will shut up on this topic now


    IP: 198.54.202.2

    elle
    Member
    Posts: 199
    Registered: Aug 1999
    posted 05-23-2001 11:42 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Once there was even a BEO port in consideration. My guess is that Windows is the only platform we will ever see.
    IP: 212.100.176.140

    Jamieh
    Member
    Posts: 113
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-23-2001 11:56 AM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My comment on the diversion of resources was based on the fact that Nemesys already seems to be constrained by their resources. So any additional development work would more than likely take away from the ongoing efforts.

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I do not really care what direction they go in, all I am saying is that from my own experience, Nemesys would build a rock-solid version of Giga much *faster* on linux than they would on XP.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Maybe if they were building it from scratch, but considering all the work they have already done on Windows, I doubt that is true.


    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I am running Giga on the same machine as my sequencer. This means windows. However, if I wanted to run Giga on a separate PC, I would want it on linux, because I *know* I can squeeze more peformance out of it. Why? Because I, as developer, could dig around inside the kernel.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If even one percent of the user base of Gigasampler wanted to be digging around in kernels I would be shocked. I always hear about how great Linux is because you can dig around in the kernel. But I\'m a programmer and even I don\'t want to deal with the kernel.

    The one thing you are right about is that Windows is a multi-purpose OS, and that does mean that it is not ever going to be GigaSampler optimized. If Nemesys wanted a GigaSampler optimized solution, they would need to build something from scratch, including the OS. Would Linux be the way to go? Possibly. The idea of a stand alone GigaStudio box that was sold not as a computer but as a GigaStudio is intriguing. Personally I would rather go with the build it yourself solution, as it is far more useful to me to have a computer that I can dual boot for either GigaStudio or normal use depending on what I need it for. But I can see why some people don\'t care about that.


    IP: 131.107.3.84

    cc
    Member
    Posts: 72
    Registered: Jun 2000
    posted 05-23-2001 12:18 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Jamieh:
    If even one percent of the user base of Gigasampler wanted to be digging around in kernels I would be shocked. I always hear about how great Linux is because you can dig around in the kernel. But I\'m a programmer and even I don\'t want to deal with the kernel.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hehe, so would I. Sorry if what I was trying to say did not come accross clearly enough.

    What I was trying to say, is that if I wanted to buy Giga for a dedicated computer, I would prefer it running the linux kernel, because I know that Nemesys as developers could squeeze more performance out of it; the reason I know this, is that if *I* were the developer, *I* would have been able to squeeze more performance out of it.

    As to digging around in the kernel, it is amazing what type of performance gains can be had simply by disabling all device drivers and stubbs that are unnecessary, and then compiling the kernel for your particular processor. This takes no programming skills, it is a matter of clicking a few boxes in a GUI.

    As for real hard core digging in the kernel, I have made mods to the networking code as part of my research, and it is really not that much of a story - and I don\'t even program for a living, well not so much anyway.

    I also don\'t think that it really matters how much development has been put into the Windows version in terms of how fast a linux version could be released - except for the one *tiny* problem regarding the lack of availability of sound card drivers (which, btw, is not insurmountable).

    And then of course the fact that the GUI would effectively get separated from the engine, which is an entire different ball-game.

    My own personal experience with developing on linux is that it is much *much* faster than windows development - when we did our real-time dsp implementations, we did not even *consider* windows for it.

    In fact, there are a number of things with distinct similarities to endless-wave type technology, already out in the linux community. It would be nice (hypothetically speaking) if Nemesys could encourage these open developers to build a linux engine.

    And then, the point would still be to allow people to build their own hardware. There is also nothing stopping you dual-booting a dedicated linux Giga engine into XP to do some other work.

    But in any case, I really do not want to argue this point - I do not work for Nemesys and I am not going to earn any money by selling linux ports. This is all hypothetical. All that I was doing was adding my support (from a DSP guy\'s perspective) to the notion that there are probably better alternatives to XP for dedicated systems. Nothing more than that.


    [This message has been edited by cc (edited 05-23-2001).]

    IP: 198.54.202.2

    Jamieh
    Member
    Posts: 113
    Registered: Nov 2000
    posted 05-23-2001 08:41 PM
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What I was trying to say, is that if I wanted to buy Giga for a dedicated computer, I would prefer it running the linux kernel, because I know that Nemesys as developers could squeeze more performance out of it; the reason I know this, is that if *I* were the developer, *I* would have been able to squeeze more performance out of it.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Gotcha. That makes sense.

    I would have no problem with Nemesys creating a Linux version of GigaStudio as long as it didn\'t delay or sacrifice features of the Windows XP version.

    IP: 131.107.3.84


    All times are ET
    next newest topic | next oldest topic


    Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
    Hop to: Select a Forum or ArchiveList of Forums:Category: Nemesys Gigastudio/GigaSampler--------------------Sound Card Advice / RecommendationsSoftware Issues/ SolutionsUser Tips & TricksSample Libraries DiscussionsHardware Issues/ SolutionsWish ListCategory: Sample Developers Network--------------------GigaSample Developers NetworkList of Archives:LINKSGigaSampler User tips and tricksPrevious Posts

    Contact Us | Northern Sound Source
    Copyright 1998 Northern Sound Source

    Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a




Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •