for DP/PTools users, PTools for Snow Leopard (finally)

[pcm]

DP 5.13 will run fine on a thee year old machine, right? If you are not willing, or able to upgrade your systems, at some point you and your system will no longer be supported. To do otherwise is to cripple everyone else. Not fair or realistic.

.

Actually DP 5.13 DAE was severely limited with no implementation of multiple outputs from RTAS VI's.
DP6 implemented mulitple RTAS outputs, but now couldn't bounce to disk or record from a buss, meaning you'd have to go out hardware to print a mix. Also on many RTAS Vi's the GUI was so screwed up you had to guess where to click for a function because it was offset a few inches (not the same in each VI) from where the GUI showed it (if it wasn't partly blank).
DP 7 promised to fix these things- a selling point of DP 7 was new improved DAE functions.
Pretty promising, but lack of tempo sync for VI's and a couple of issues have DP/DAE users thinking - this should be a small bug fix- DP 7.03 maybe. Now, without giving any warning, Digidesign pretty much takes away any reason for MOTU to spend a few hours on this.

Here we bought DP7 for DAE entirely, and digidesign is basically saying, "We are looking ahead, so we are not going to support our user base"

It totally lacks integrity to abandon users before delivering what was promised.
Be glib if you like when it doesn't affect you, but wait and see how you feel marginalized when something you find important to work with becomes "dispensible".
Or maybe some users can be content with their creativety resticted to just whatever loops and sounds are in fashionas the latest at any given moment.

I have been using DP since the late 90's (on a lesser scale since the late 80's actually), and PTHD (and it's ancestors) since the mid-90's. I started trying to run DP/DAE with DP 4.6, and PT 6.9. It didn't work very well, and no combo I have tried since has, at least not for me. That's four years. To assume that "a few hours" was going to somehow make this all work is far from the reality of the situation. I know that there are some who do in fact use this combo, and I don't doubt that this is major bad news for them. But I also maintain that this is a very small group, and it's simply too small to be supported. Money and resources are tight. End of story, right?

Digi has said that it wasn't until september that they realized that they would have to drop PPC support. That's seven months after PT8 shipped. They announced that 8.01 was the end, so it was no surprise when 8.03 came out. And 8.01 works pretty well, it's not like it is crashware by any stretch. I don't see this as an ethics issue. It's simply about technology moving on. We've all seen this before, numerous times. Motu will have to drop PPC support at some point too. As will absolutely everyone else. OS9, gone. Classic, gone. PPC, and pre-SN software, soon to be gone. It's now all about Intel multi-core and multi-threaded chips, and SN. Everything else before it is rapidly turning into Neanderthal cave paintings.

Okay, let me step out on a limb here. New Macs smoke any non-Intel Mac. To a shocking degree, actually. Especially if you are running a DAW. If you can't afford (or don't want to afford) one of these monsters, then at least get out of our way, so that Digi and Motu can design and build the software of the future. PPC code is a drag. A drag on speed, power, development costs, etc. Snow Leopard sings on my new Macs, in large part because that old legacy code is gone. As the saying goes, "Lead, or get out of the way". I sold all my G5s this year, and bit the bullet. I make my living in front of a DAW. I need what I need. I want cutting edge code, so I can do my job, both faster and better. I don't want DAE support, because it's never worked very well for me, and it eats resources. And I don't want PPC support, because it's as dead as a zombie, and it eats resources. (A good analogy now that I think about it, PPC being a zombie, eating resources!) If you insist on running your PPC machine into the ground, fine. But the train is leaving the station, and you're not on it. Okay, shoot me now.

[James Steele]

The PTLE8 update was a paid update, as was DP7. But this is all semantics here. DP7 is really DP6.1, but they charged for it because it was over a year later, and they wanted their subscription fee, just like every other update business model-based company does. PTLE 8.03 has also come out a year later (after 8.0), but is not being called PTLE9. Would you rather they call it PTLE9, and charge you another $150., so that you can then say that PPC (and DAE) support ended with a major release? How is this different?

Personally, I'd rather keep my $150., than pay $199. for a .dot release bug fix version.

I've been around for nearly every upgrade of Performer and Digital Performer after that, and I think that DP7 was one of the best .0 upgrades ever.

I agree. But that is because (in my opinion) DP7 is in fact DP6.1.

Hey... but since we're just throwing out opinions now, your choice of the words "in fact" is odd, isn't it. Chalk me up as another person who thinks DP 7 is IN FACT DP 7. Controversial, huh?

[James Steele]

But the train is leaving the station, and you're not on it. Okay, shoot me now.

Right, but that train leaves several times a day, and I'm not in a hurry. Besides... every subsequent train is faster and better designed and more capable.

[n2mpujack]

I have been using DP since the late 90's (on a lesser scale since the late 80's actually), and PTHD (and it's ancestors) since the mid-90's. I started trying to run DP/DAE with DP 4.6, and PT 6.9. It didn't work very well, and no combo I have tried since has, at least not for me. That's four years. To assume that "a few hours" was going to somehow make this all work is far from the reality of the situation. I know that there are some who do in fact use this combo, and I don't doubt that this is major bad news for them. But I also maintain that this is a very small group, and it's simply too small to be supported. Money and resources are tight. End of story, right?

Digi has said that it wasn't until september that they realized that they would have to drop PPC support. That's seven months after PT8 shipped. They announced that 8.01 was the end, so it was no surprise when 8.03 came out. And 8.01 works pretty well, it's not like it is crashware by any stretch. I don't see this as an ethics issue. It's simply about technology moving on. We've all seen this before, numerous times. Motu will have to drop PPC support at some point too. As will absolutely everyone else. OS9, gone. Classic, gone. PPC, and pre-SN software, soon to be gone. It's now all about Intel multi-core and multi-threaded chips, and SN. Everything else before it is rapidly turning into Neanderthal cave paintings.

Okay, let me step out on a limb here. New Macs smoke any non-Intel Mac. To a shocking degree, actually. Especially if you are running a DAW. If you can't afford (or don't want to afford) one of these monsters, then at least get out of our way, so that Digi and Motu can design and build the software of the future. PPC code is a drag. A drag on speed, power, development costs, etc. Snow Leopard sings on my new Macs, in large part because that old legacy code is gone. As the saying goes, "Lead, or get out of the way". I sold all my G5s this year, and bit the bullet. I make my living in front of a DAW. I need what I need. I want cutting edge code, so I can do my job, both faster and better. I don't want DAE support, because it's never worked very well for me, and it eats resources. And I don't want PPC support, because it's as dead as a zombie, and it eats resources. (A good analogy now that I think about it, PPC being a zombie, eating resources!) If you insist on running your PPC machine into the ground, fine. But the train is leaving the station, and you're not on it. Okay, shoot me now.

Not going to shoot you now (wasn't that a line in an old Warner Brothers Bugs BUnny/Daffy Duck/Elmer Fudd cartoon?). Or later, as you speak a truth that a small few don't want to hear. People buying new Macs have to use Snow Leopard, right? Should these people be shut out of using a newer, faster machine with PT if the old PPC code was holding back development? Heck no! Use the old Mac for email and web surfing or as a slave machine running VI's to the new Mac. People probably forget about that last little part. Stick MIDI & audio interfaces on the old one and treat it like you would any other hardware synth. That's what I'll be doing with my old PPC laptop.

Actually, the quote is: "Lead, follow, or get out of the way".

[pcm]

But the train is leaving the station, and you're not on it. Okay, shoot me now.

Right, but that train leaves several times a day, and I'm not in a hurry. Besides... every subsequent train is faster and better designed and more capable.

Right you are. All I am saying is that the coders are at a crossroads now. Apple has dropped PPC support. Chip manufacturers have been unable to make significant strides in clock speeds for several years now, so they are adding cores and multi-threads to boost power. Apple now has Grand Central Station to allows developers to address this power. And that is Snow Leopard only. To ask (and expect/demand) coders to continue to support EOL software is to plunder resources that the rest of us need for future development. Even my fifteen-year-old daughter is demanding a new Mac, as her three-year-old PPC iMac literally can't play back the video shot with her HD camera. Yes, every new train is faster, but the Intel/SN train is a quantum leap over the PPC/any OS train, and one that requires different coding than the new train. If you were a software vender, how would YOU want to allocate your coding dollars?

[Don T]

Have her shoot in standard def edit to dvd, she cant play that blue ray very many places anyway.

[Shooshie]

The PTLE8 update was a paid update, as was DP7. But this is all semantics here. DP7 is really DP6.1, but they charged for it because it was over a year later, and they wanted their subscription fee, just like every other update business model-based company does. PTLE 8.03 has also come out a year later (after 8.0), but is not being called PTLE9. Would you rather they call it PTLE9, and charge you another $150., so that you can then say that PPC (and DAE) support ended with a major release? How is this different?

Personally, I'd rather keep my $150., than pay $199. for a .dot release bug fix version.

I've been around for nearly every upgrade of Performer and Digital Performer after that, and I think that DP7 was one of the best .0 upgrades ever.

I agree. But that is because (in my opinion) DP7 is in fact DP6.1.

You're insufferable! But if there's one thing I've learned about musicians, it's that we are an opinionated lot. Well, that can be your opinion. But DP7 is DP7, and to me it makes perfect sense. Why are we even discussing their numbering system here? Hmmm... maybe I should change the number to DP 6.1 and see if it SOUNDS better! Or maybe it makes my velocities more velocitous and my gives soundbites more teeth!

Shoosh

[ssfm]

I can't believe they would actually introduce yet another version of ProTools. Their product matrix (and website) is a jumbled, confusing mess of versions, all with different feature sets, limitations, hardware requirements, etc. It's reminiscent of Apple 15 years ago, when they had probably a dozen different computer models. If Avid management had any sense, they would dump the entire HD/LE/Mpowered/Essentials scheme, and sell one product called ProTools that runs natively on whatever hardware the customer chooses to use. Their development and support costs would drop to a fraction of what they spend now.

It appears that Avid management has finally come to their senses.