WWDC Discussions and Teasers

Macintosh software/hardware discussion and troubleshooting

Moderator: James Steele

User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

James Steele wrote:Also... found it interesting that some people have expressed concern that Logic has more money behind it than DP, hence MOTU can't compete. How much money does Microsoft have and they still can't get Vista released? The comparison Jobs made of how the Mac OS has progressed in the last 5 years and what Apple has accomplished compared to Microsoft's languishing OS is astounding.
Hmm. I've sort of had this image of OSX being akin to Beta format and Windows being VHS. The best is rarely the most popular.

But Jobs' has done a good 'job' at pulling the weeds, so to speak, by severing ties with companies that don't deliver. It's amazing that Apple has survived at all through YEARS and YEARS where corporate takeovers have been the status quo.

Keeping it positive, the same amazement takes me when I think of MOTU hanging in there against the odds-- when Apple itself, as the corporate big dog in this instance, acquires Logic, Avid and Digidesign have connected, Steinberg/Yamaha, etc.

But in terms of the consumer, whether amateur or pro, there are three things that sell software:

1. CPU efficiency
2. User-friendly GUI
3. Bang-for-buck

I dare not say who's who, but the big 3-4 DAWs all get only two of the three (at the most) categories in different combos right at this time, but we're still a ways from any one DAW getting all three categories right.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Post by HCMarkus »

Barefeats has a few thoughts on the new Mac Pro at

http://barefeats.com/quad05.html

I wonder if MOTU is gonna' have to rework the PCIe card again...
Will graphics cards from the PCI-Express Dual-Core G5 Power Macs work in the Mac Pro? NO.
Will graphics cards from the Mac Pro work in the Dual-Core G5 Power Macs? NO.
Will standard Windows PC graphics cards work in the Mac Pro? NO. They require special firmware to work in the Mac Pro.
Is there support for SLI on the Mac Pro? NO.
HC Markus
M1 Mac Studio Ultra • 64GB RAM • 828es • macOS 14.7 • DP 11.32
https://rbohemia.com
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

HCMarkus wrote:Barefeats has a few thoughts on the new Mac Pro at

http://barefeats.com/quad05.html

I wonder if MOTU is gonna' have to rework the PCIe card again...
Will graphics cards from the PCI-Express Dual-Core G5 Power Macs work in the Mac Pro? NO.
Will graphics cards from the Mac Pro work in the Dual-Core G5 Power Macs? NO.
Will standard Windows PC graphics cards work in the Mac Pro? NO. They require special firmware to work in the Mac Pro.
Is there support for SLI on the Mac Pro? NO.
Oh, HC--- Dude

Check it out--

We're in for a bumpy road. Getting into a Mac Pro comfortably is going to take major investments in peripherals, RAM, HD's, etc.

The entire PCI thing is only tempered by the fact that Apple has limited the user to three available slots since the days of the G4. Mixed blessing. Less to upgrade, but no simple card swap as in the days of old. New cards all around.

Now. Who wants a 2Ghz model? I ask because:

1. Leopard is not due until Spring--

10.5.0? Hmm.
10.5.1? Maybe.
10.5.2? Promising for real functionality and stability with true 64-bit *capability*. Let's say-- Fall, 2007. By then new processors just may be offered and the 2G model will be history.

2. True 64-bit functionality will then hinge on software developers getting up to speed. Not going to happen quickly. (January, 2008 for apps?)

Transition is not painless, but then no one made any promises to that effect, I suppose.

Just scratching me widdle head and watching the signs.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
monkey man
Posts: 13977
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by monkey man »

Frodo wrote:My Melbourne Friend:
Truth was meant to be shared, tested, and shared again.
Ah, that's how I've always determined the truth.
It can be painful, but if there's no other way... :wink:
Frodo wrote:Thought I needed to add a more useful "useless musing" to the eqaution! :lol:
Useful it shall be. Thanks again.
James Steele wrote:A bunch of tech stuff
Hey, Jimbo.
I read and completely agree with your recent posts regarding guitar bottom-end etc.
I also read some of your opinions on melodic playing, and I whole-heartedly agree with them, too.
I automatically respect your guitar sensibilities....

So how, oh, how are you able to wear a propellor-cap with such aplomb? :lol:

PS: You need not answer, Jimbo.
As you've probably learned by now, just like a mosquito, if you ignore me for long enough, I'll just... go away! :lol:

Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack

Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Post by HCMarkus »

We're in for a bumpy road. Getting into a Mac Pro comfortably is going to take major investments in peripherals, RAM, HD's, etc.
Yes Mr. Frodo, you're so right. The fact that the upgrade path is strewn with so many potholes and pitfalls is frustrating. You hit it on the head: January 2008 will come, and it will then be about time to make the switch to MacIntel for serious work. In the interim, PPC Duals and Quads will start appearing in bargain bins across the nation, and may become an appealing alternative to many. Especially when one realizes how much the Mac Pro memory costs...

I'd say buy a Quad PPC instead of the 2.0 gHz Mac Pro machine; Vote for music production over software incompatibility. We already have the best tools the audio world has ever known right here in our hands. We will always seek greater power in our rigs, but as I recall the challenges and expense of working with tape and outboard gear and compare that experience to what we enjoy today, I feel really lucky to have the chance to actually use this stuff to make music.
HC Markus
M1 Mac Studio Ultra • 64GB RAM • 828es • macOS 14.7 • DP 11.32
https://rbohemia.com
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

HCMarkus wrote:I'd say buy a Quad PPC instead of the 2.0 gHz Mac Pro machine; Vote for music production over software incompatibility. We already have the best tools the audio world has ever known right here in our hands. We will always seek greater power in our rigs, but as I recall the challenges and expense of working with tape and outboard gear and compare that experience to what we enjoy today, I feel really lucky to have the chance to actually use this stuff to make music.
You are quite right.

So here's my question du jour:

Will Leopard turn the Quad PPC into the scream machine it was meant to be?

1. Apple will frown if potential buyers of new Macs are not jumping over to Intel as eagerly as they would like. A factory recall could bring dealer-refurbished sales of the Quad PPC to a grinding halt. (Need I mention a possible e-bay frenzy?)

2. If the Quad stays on the market, and if there is such a demand for it, the prices won't drop *so quickly*. Demand works wonders with discontinued items holding their value.

We're still waiting to hear test results on the big 3G machine, but so far the early Intel results show some curious signs.

The improvements are in areas that won't increase VI instance count *enough* [for me] to justify replacing my current G5 just yet. There's a discussion on another thread dealing with VIs where users agree that the results do not point to the Intel as being an all-in-one box just yet.

Add to this the fact that despite improved HD bus speeds, we're still looking at the same old HD transfer rates.

Just for the record, I do think the Intel is a good thing. I'm happy to see it. But the fine print to get an Intel up to speed now is more expensive than it appears on the surface-- and more problemmatic because:

1. Leopard is still months away, which is central to true 64-bit processing

2. Apps are gradually getting to UB, slowly going to Intel, and are not exactly announcing their 64-bit plans with much eargerness.

3. Such apps and their users are still working to overcome the UB era, which will probably be as short-lived as the dual-boot 9-to-X era, perhaps shorter.

There's a bit of info missing from MOTU about using UB-- many *clues* are in place regarding updating certain plugins such as the Audioease, but while they cite the 5.1 plugs as being UB, there's next to nothing regarding the apparent necessity of rebuilding the bundles, which has been a source of many problems for so many users.

Come to think of it, the 3G Monster Mac itself might be at the bottom of the heap (if not fossilized) by the time Leopard and software really get up to speed.

I'm going to watch, wait, and save up.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Post by HCMarkus »

Will Leopard turn the Quad PPC into the scream machine it was meant to be?
Without 64-bit applications to run, will we see any significant gains in perrformance?
HC Markus
M1 Mac Studio Ultra • 64GB RAM • 828es • macOS 14.7 • DP 11.32
https://rbohemia.com
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

HCMarkus wrote:
Will Leopard turn the Quad PPC into the scream machine it was meant to be?
Without 64-bit applications to run, will we see any significant gains in perrformance?
The operative phrase is "significant gains".

I think we will experience improved performance. Already, I'm encouraged by the apparent greater stability of DP 5.1 being reported by most members here, with much consideration to those who beg to differ. DP-UB on Intel seems to have gotten some alarming reports of it running slower, and there is at least one PPC user who has said DP-UB is running slower.

With that in mind, I've looked at the current barefeats benchmarks and the improvements aren't exactly sending me out the door with my credit card in hand today. But we've been waiting for 64-bit apps and functionality for some time, so until Leopard gets here to address it, there must be many other features with the new machines or any Tiger's updates to come (if any) that appeal to Mac users.

It just may be that 64-bit apps are not that big of a deal to some, but I would think these improvements would be greatly appreciated by Post-2.0 Ghz PPC Mac users, especially.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Post by HCMarkus »

I guess we'll just have to wait and see if DP makes it to 64-bit before UB is retired... Of course, all the plugs would have to be re-coded as well.

I'm not holding my breath.

My system is working so nicely now, it pains me to consider doing it all again anytime soon. And, since this version of DP has everything I need, I don't think I will!

Thanks for the insights Mr. F. I'm going on vacation.
HC Markus
M1 Mac Studio Ultra • 64GB RAM • 828es • macOS 14.7 • DP 11.32
https://rbohemia.com
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

HCMarkus wrote:... I'm going on vacation.
That sounds like the greatest idea I've heard in ages. Safe journeys! 8)
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
monkey man
Posts: 13977
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by monkey man »

Frodo wrote:You are quite right.
So here's my question du jour:
Will Leopard turn the Quad PPC into the scream machine it was meant to be?
Data:"Does the term "Scream machine" qualify as a teaser, captain?

Picard:"Once a little-known Hobbit term of the early 21st century, I believe it does, ensign. As you were". :D

Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack

Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

monkey man wrote:
Frodo wrote:You are quite right.
So here's my question du jour:
Will Leopard turn the Quad PPC into the scream machine it was meant to be?
Data:"Does the term "Scream machine" qualify as a teaser, captain?

Picard:"Once a little-known Hobbit term of the early 21st century, I believe it does, ensign. As you were". :D
LOL!! Let's just hope it doesn't turn the Quad into "number two", if you take my meaning! :shock: :P
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
monkey man
Posts: 13977
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by monkey man »

The clever little Hobbit wrote:LOL!! Let's just hope it doesn't turn the Quad into "number two", if you take my meaning! :shock: :P
You're a genius. :lol:

Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack

Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
Post Reply