OS 9 Users

atom_b · Post by **atom_b** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 am

No, I'm not on an Apple Compute anymore, but about Jobs' announcement I am really excited... I was using MS-OSs from NT to XP for stability and I was lucky to be able to use Intel processors for performance with these OSs. I had my expieriences with Mac OS 8 to 10 as well, and let me tell here, that I am damn confident, that loads of bullshit talk and neurotic lies, concerning stability, performance and availability - and Altivec - will end from now on. Mac OS X is almost a good one, and it will perform even better now, well, and 2K as well as XP, there was never ever something to be really woried about.

Any political issues aside, now it will be really the time to look after who has the better looking hardware and case. Developers out there support this step towards phliosophical and technical realism! And we'll make the music...!

Milkmansound · Post by **Milkmansound** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:31 am

my thinking was that certain people (like my friend who works in California for a company that you know well - something to do with a famous mouse) have no plans on upgrading to X because its a huge leap. Therefore, they will not be able to gain access to the new features. Frozen in time. Certain other manufacturers (you know, the evil monopoly that has something to do with tools) make it difficult to update - yes, even years after X was released. Thats all I am saying - its a shame that it has to be that way, but I obviously understand.

rand · Post by **rand** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:13 am

Well, somethings not quite right in the Mac code
because when one runs in standalone mode it can take 50%+ cpu use
but in ReWire mode (with LogicPro7) it's around 10%...
(Sorry, number values are by memory...)

Hmmmm, Live is still doing 'everything' except talking to coreaudio
& the audio interface... (plus it's also talking to ReWire bus...)
And this is on my dual 2.5 G5! yowww...

Love the program all the same

but just wondering 'what's up with that'?
rRand

3phase · Post by **3phase** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:55 pm

Robert Henke wrote:Hmm, Apple is going to use intel chips in the future. Good bye Altivec. You should praise us for not waisting resources into a technology which we tested and did not get a significant boost and which would have had the huge problem of maintaining two code bases.

Robert

Interesting..and you knew that all the time?...
And the safed resources brought me the Live 4 nightmare? I praise....

And what intel processors? maybe something new that needs to be supported aswell?...
For sure apple will brew its own soup somehow...

I see the problem with the 2 codebases...But this is a problem any music software company has...mac is still big in the musicans scene..as you know

Some handle it better than others.

BWL students are ruling the world... This wont lead to anything good in the long term.

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:58 pm

I don't work for Ableton, or have any connection with them but I can say this with confidence.

there will never be AltiVec support in Live

OSX intel doesnt support OS9 , classic or AltiVec instructions, so it's really not worth requesting them. PPC will be out of production within 2 years.

I am wondering .. Abletons did you consult a mystic about this? if not ...

well done for not wasting your time on AltiVec optimisation! I bet you are all feeling justifiably pleased with yourselves about now

now you can put your efforts into SSE2 optimisation !

*joke*

rand · Post by **rand** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:18 pm

OR... just spend more quality time on Mac OSX
dual proc & code optimizations...

Through it has been often mentioned,
who cares if it uses Altivec or not?.
'The issue is'...
that Live is the worse performing music/media ap on the Mac.
'We' do NOT have this problem with any other media ap
(maybe Stienbergs but I heard it has improved.)
There is just something not quite right with the code.
(see my post 2 above fer more.)
cheers & luv ya just the same,
rRand

stiefelmusik · Post by **stiefelmusik** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:45 pm

Well, I knew it was inevitable, but I'm still disappointed that OS 9 is being dropped. I have to wonder just what new features being introduced in Live 5 simply COULD NOT exist on OS 9. I seriously doubt many. The same goes for so many other excellent programs which were prematurely cut off from OS 9 in the rush towards X. At least Ableton gave us a major release in 2004--something no one else I can think of did (in the audio world, at least). Nope. Everyone's gone X. What a pity. OS 9 may not be "state of the art" but I still maintain it's a superior platform for working with audio, and it comes with a LOT LESS HEADACHE. At least, that's been my experience. LONG LIVE OS 9! LONG LIVE LIVE 4!

noisetonepause · Post by **noisetonepause** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:33 pm

what you mean, less headache?

borg · Post by **borg** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:32 am

stiefelmusik wrote:Everyone's gone X.

except creamware...

ha well, from now on the old G3 will truly be my synth/fx rack/mixer, rather than a DAW.

melocoton · Post by **melocoton** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:33 pm

If you haven't already upgraded to OS X then why on earth would you need to upgrade to Live 5? It seems like you're either the upgrading type or not. I can't imagine why someone would insist on being on the cutting edge of application updates but not update their damn OS! It's absurd. Especially considering that OS X is light years beyond what OS 9 ever was. A lot of people seem to cling to some pretty irrational fears about their computers.

hambone1 · Post by **hambone1** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:07 am

I, too, was reluctant to give up my OS9 for OSX.. kinda like giving up your old teddy bear for one of the new-fangled Sony electronic robot dogs!

My day job forced me to use OSX. I'm damn glad it did.

kay101011 · Post by **kay101011** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 2:11 pm

Robert Henke wrote: We do not split audio processing into different threads and this means all audio runs on one processor. But on a dual processor machine the audio thread and the rest runs on seperate CPUs, allowing you to have a higher CPU load without loosing the control over the interface.

is there any reason than this for using only one audio work thread?
i think that the GUI shouldn't use to much processor, since my powerbook is able to run live

let's say on a dual 2ghz computer with heavy audioload it uses 100% of processor 1 and only 10% of processor 2 (for the GUI and anything else) .. isn't it a waste of 45% of the total computation power??

xl5 · Post by **xl5** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:42 am

kay101011 wrote: is there any reason than this for using only one audio work thread?
i think that the GUI shouldn't use to much processor, since my powerbook is able to run live
let's say on a dual 2ghz computer with heavy audioload it uses 100% of processor 1 and only 10% of processor 2 (for the GUI and anything else) .. isn't it a waste of 45% of the total computation power??

I don't know just how much of a waste it is but it most definitely is a waste. Dual CPUs support should be on the TOP of their priority list for Live 6 (should've been 5 but…). Already Live is not the best performing (at least on a mac) music app. and Logic and Cubase already support dual cpu's.

anti-banausic · Post by **anti-banausic** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 5:54 am

Ok, look, last July/August I got to see Gerhard give a demonstration of LIVE4 when it was newly born here in new york. And guess what computer he was using.....a G4 laptop. I think that a lot of these guys are using Apples....they probably want all the things that you want because, don't forget, some of them actually make music with the same software that you are using....

And all the comparisons to Cubase or Logic....I know it is do-able, but have you gigged with either of those lately?

Look, I trust these guys. I understand there is no problem in asking for more and newer features, and some that you would think would have been obvious for a long time....but their priorities may be a little different than other DAWs....

So, ask for what features you may want, but in no way does that mean be an ignoramous. You are not the only one for which this earth revolves around this sun....you should count your blessings that you even are before you open your mouth and show that you are really ignorant of the life that has been bestowed upon you.

I mean, I could bitch about dual CPU support, or h/t support, but in reality, I choose to use this software because it makes making music more creative, individual, and spontaneous than other software....if you would like something different than so-be-it.

Or, if you didn't want to read all that, just ask nicely!!!!

Pitch Black · Post by **Pitch Black** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:11 am

I wish to concur with the learned member's above statement.

(last time I saw mr henke playing he was on OS9 to boot... so.

)

OS 9 Users

ha, what a day!!!