Os X on Intel
-
Guest
Subject: Why ???
Why do you whant an second bloated System like the OS-X (?)
There ist already the fine BeOS for Intel-Computers! This is the real OS for the Future! It's compact and very fast near like hardwareprogrammed sourcecode!
Be patient for this. It takes time!
Don't get involved with OS-X. It only seems like an professional System. The surface disappoints you. Creamware disappoints you with the Graphicsurface, too!
Chiau
Why do you whant an second bloated System like the OS-X (?)
There ist already the fine BeOS for Intel-Computers! This is the real OS for the Future! It's compact and very fast near like hardwareprogrammed sourcecode!
Be patient for this. It takes time!
Don't get involved with OS-X. It only seems like an professional System. The surface disappoints you. Creamware disappoints you with the Graphicsurface, too!
Chiau
-
Guest
Subject: RE: OS-X for Intel and BeOS
Hi Mike
I think the MacOS is the best choice at the moment, and MacOS 10 will really benefit from the underlying BSD Unix (very stable), but the prices for the PowerPCs are too high for their speed at the moment. The PC stuff is cheaper no question. This is the reason for an OS-X on Intel wish.
About BeOS:
The BeOS would really be the best OS for realtime Audio, but whithout programms every OS will die, and at the moment that seems to be the case for BeOS, as for example Steinberg and others stopped their developement for Be, sadly.
Maybe you have more Info about that, but this is, as far as I know, the situation at the moment.
so long Thomas
Hi Mike
I think the MacOS is the best choice at the moment, and MacOS 10 will really benefit from the underlying BSD Unix (very stable), but the prices for the PowerPCs are too high for their speed at the moment. The PC stuff is cheaper no question. This is the reason for an OS-X on Intel wish.
About BeOS:
The BeOS would really be the best OS for realtime Audio, but whithout programms every OS will die, and at the moment that seems to be the case for BeOS, as for example Steinberg and others stopped their developement for Be, sadly.
Maybe you have more Info about that, but this is, as far as I know, the situation at the moment.
so long Thomas
-
Guest
Subject: Why not?
Hi !
Interesting subject: OS X versus BeOS. I guess nearly all PC users are a bit tired of Windoze, and need something new and improved.
Personally, I like both, BeOS is probably more efficient to our needs, but it has been here for a quite long time now, and you can get very little software as far as I know.
Please correct me, if I am wrong.
Emagic stopped their Logic series for BeOS earlier this year, and as this was the only attempt at a pro sequencer for BeOS, you can probably only get small shareware types.
If this is the case, companies like CW will not be very likely to convert drivers, GUI's etc for BeOS. Old story about egg versus chicken.....
OS-X for PC's on the other hand, may have a better shot at getting sufficiently popular for hardware- and software people to start writing, since it is (supposed to be) capable of using "old" Apple software (with some loss of efficiency).
It is based on a unix/linux core, and allows multitasking etc.
Of course nobody really knows how well this will work yet, my guess is that Apple will simply have to do a good job, or they are dead some years from now.
Therefore, I think that OS X (for PC's also) is not such a bad idea. It may not be the best OS, but it has a better chance in the long run, since the software is already there (although it is perhaps less than perfect), and it is easily updated.
Anyway, it's likely to be better than windoze....
Comments, anyone ?
Cheers
Stubbe
Hi !
Interesting subject: OS X versus BeOS. I guess nearly all PC users are a bit tired of Windoze, and need something new and improved.
Personally, I like both, BeOS is probably more efficient to our needs, but it has been here for a quite long time now, and you can get very little software as far as I know.
Please correct me, if I am wrong.
Emagic stopped their Logic series for BeOS earlier this year, and as this was the only attempt at a pro sequencer for BeOS, you can probably only get small shareware types.
If this is the case, companies like CW will not be very likely to convert drivers, GUI's etc for BeOS. Old story about egg versus chicken.....
OS-X for PC's on the other hand, may have a better shot at getting sufficiently popular for hardware- and software people to start writing, since it is (supposed to be) capable of using "old" Apple software (with some loss of efficiency).
It is based on a unix/linux core, and allows multitasking etc.
Of course nobody really knows how well this will work yet, my guess is that Apple will simply have to do a good job, or they are dead some years from now.
Therefore, I think that OS X (for PC's also) is not such a bad idea. It may not be the best OS, but it has a better chance in the long run, since the software is already there (although it is perhaps less than perfect), and it is easily updated.
Anyway, it's likely to be better than windoze....
Comments, anyone ?
Cheers
Stubbe
-
Guest
Subject: absolutely right
absolutely right, what you say about the hen and the eggs
maybe macOS X for intels x86 has more chances than the deadborn BeOS - well, darwin (the kernel) is already fully intel-compatible and freed by apple as an open-source project. if OS X won´t be released for intel, then a comercial darwin-version might - like linux is adapted by some software manufacturers, someone could make THE music-OS out of darwin.
well, ME seems to have better timing than 98se, i´ll test that... the only alternative is a very very exxxxxxpensive mac. but ME is so fat... 600mb or so... it won´t fit into my ramdisk.... *whine*... i let my travel go to redmond next year and then... i have a look on those people, who treat me so....
absolutely right, what you say about the hen and the eggs
maybe macOS X for intels x86 has more chances than the deadborn BeOS - well, darwin (the kernel) is already fully intel-compatible and freed by apple as an open-source project. if OS X won´t be released for intel, then a comercial darwin-version might - like linux is adapted by some software manufacturers, someone could make THE music-OS out of darwin.
well, ME seems to have better timing than 98se, i´ll test that... the only alternative is a very very exxxxxxpensive mac. but ME is so fat... 600mb or so... it won´t fit into my ramdisk.... *whine*... i let my travel go to redmond next year
and then... i have a look on those people, who treat me so.... -
Guest
Subject: Thank you for your words of wisdom!
Apple has already shown that Windows-based systems have no competition when dealing with the pro audio scene. The difference is in the OS, not in the hardware. The Motorola processors are almost the only thing keeping PCs and Macs separated. Motorola seems to have some problems keeping scores even in speed with PC processors. Therefore the Mac hardware might come to it's end fairly soon. Let's hope that the dying hardware won't kill the great OS!
Apple has already shown that Windows-based systems have no competition when dealing with the pro audio scene. The difference is in the OS, not in the hardware. The Motorola processors are almost the only thing keeping PCs and Macs separated. Motorola seems to have some problems keeping scores even in speed with PC processors. Therefore the Mac hardware might come to it's end fairly soon. Let's hope that the dying hardware won't kill the great OS!
-
Guest
