you seem to be following me just fine mesmer.
I understand what's going on with bootcamp a bit better
Anyways, as long as I've known ableton live I've known that you get more performance juice out of XP - pound for pound. According to all the threads and anecdotal evidence that is. So I'm a little bewildered by the expectation that OSX & XP should give the same performance results on the same machine.... if OSX & XP deliver the same results on seperate but identically spec'd intel machines , then ya I can see why someone might expect their OSX to match their bootcamp'd XP in reverb count.....
otherwise, I dont see much point to figuring out why tim's XP is outperforming his OSX - it's always been that way in my mind.
y'get me ?
Oh why is Live so much slower on OSX vs Bootcamp'd XP
I understand your angle now,
I didn't have that historical perspective ...
funny and all this time I thougth I had the underperformer in my HD. What with so many stage artists proudly glaring their macs... I guess it goes to show that people can place more importance on stability/reliability/easy-of-use than performing marks.
Makes me want to go to python.org and investigate thier OS benchmarks. Maybe it's a genetic issue....
ok. another useless thread-ending comment, this one's sinking.
-h
I didn't have that historical perspective ...
funny and all this time I thougth I had the underperformer in my HD. What with so many stage artists proudly glaring their macs... I guess it goes to show that people can place more importance on stability/reliability/easy-of-use than performing marks.
Makes me want to go to python.org and investigate thier OS benchmarks. Maybe it's a genetic issue....
ok. another useless thread-ending comment, this one's sinking.
-h
http://www.mesmero.net
---
---
---
---
Hidden Driveways wrote:This doesn't answer your question at all, but I said it anyway simply for the joy of making a post.
Hey,huffcw wrote:Too bad we can't just boot directly into Ableton Live with no operating system running in the background - would have to think the result would be some significant performance gains.
I read someone doing that on these forums. wait maybe it was some of the monome's software, that somebody used that way....
you'd still need a skeletal OS to talk to your hardware though.
-h
http://www.mesmero.net
---
---
---
---
Hidden Driveways wrote:This doesn't answer your question at all, but I said it anyway simply for the joy of making a post.
These are the Corollaries of this thread:
1. If you value reliability/ease-of-fuss thou shalt not hate your MBP
2. If you value performance-per-pound thou shalt poo poo in it's general direction.
-h
1. If you value reliability/ease-of-fuss thou shalt not hate your MBP
2. If you value performance-per-pound thou shalt poo poo in it's general direction.
-h
http://www.mesmero.net
---
---
---
---
Hidden Driveways wrote:This doesn't answer your question at all, but I said it anyway simply for the joy of making a post.
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
Performance or not, everytime I use Windows I'm genuinely surprised exactly how shite it is. I honestly, honestly cannot understand how anyone can bear using it. It is a clusterfuck and a travesty and we'd be better off if not so much as one key command of its legacy lived to see the end of this month.
(And it can take the BIOS and 386 compatibility with it!)
Wouldn't it be great to have a user interface that, you know, invited applications to work together? Instead of just keeping everything maximised and doing everything in thousand pound suites like Dreamweaver?
Wouldn't it be great to have a UI with a single, coherent vision, one metaphor that ran as the basis of the man/machine interaction?
Wouldn't it be great to have an OS that invited hacking and tinkering, that opened itself up when you asked it to? That didn't try to hide its functionality behind cryptic naming schemes and a lack of documentation? And last, but not least, that behaved in an at least somewhat predictable manner?
I tell you, mates, we are being robbed! Robbed of endless opportunities! Robbed of sleep and our blood pressure! Of our way to make our own fortune! Silver And Gold!
...
(And it can take the BIOS and 386 compatibility with it!)
Wouldn't it be great to have a user interface that, you know, invited applications to work together? Instead of just keeping everything maximised and doing everything in thousand pound suites like Dreamweaver?
Wouldn't it be great to have a UI with a single, coherent vision, one metaphor that ran as the basis of the man/machine interaction?
Wouldn't it be great to have an OS that invited hacking and tinkering, that opened itself up when you asked it to? That didn't try to hide its functionality behind cryptic naming schemes and a lack of documentation? And last, but not least, that behaved in an at least somewhat predictable manner?
I tell you, mates, we are being robbed! Robbed of endless opportunities! Robbed of sleep and our blood pressure! Of our way to make our own fortune! Silver And Gold!
...
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
AAaaaaAaaa mm eeeennnnnnnnn!noisetonepause wrote:Performance or not, everytime I use Windows I'm genuinely surprised exactly how shite it is. I honestly, honestly cannot understand how anyone can bear using it. It is a clusterfuck and a travesty and we'd be better off if not so much as one key command of its legacy lived to see the end of this month.
(And it can take the BIOS and 386 compatibility with it!)
Wouldn't it be great to have a user interface that, you know, invited applications to work together? Instead of just keeping everything maximised and doing everything in thousand pound suites like Dreamweaver?
Wouldn't it be great to have a UI with a single, coherent vision, one metaphor that ran as the basis of the man/machine interaction?
Wouldn't it be great to have an OS that invited hacking and tinkering, that opened itself up when you asked it to? That didn't try to hide its functionality behind cryptic naming schemes and a lack of documentation? And last, but not least, that behaved in an at least somewhat predictable manner?
I tell you, mates, we are being robbed! Robbed of endless opportunities! Robbed of sleep and our blood pressure! Of our way to make our own fortune! Silver And Gold!
...
http://www.mesmero.net
---
---
---
---
Hidden Driveways wrote:This doesn't answer your question at all, but I said it anyway simply for the joy of making a post.
I find that outlook quite bewildering actually - I mean I can understand you maybe preferring one over the other, but windows really isnt that bad - in fact I am that used to it I find it way more frustrating using OSX - and I'm sure alot of that is just down to familiaritynoisetonepause wrote:Performance or not, everytime I use Windows I'm genuinely surprised exactly how shite it is. I honestly, honestly cannot understand how anyone can bear using it. It is a clusterfuck and a travesty and we'd be better off if not so much as one key command of its legacy lived to see the end of this month.
(And it can take the BIOS and 386 compatibility with it!)
Wouldn't it be great to have a user interface that, you know, invited applications to work together? Instead of just keeping everything maximised and doing everything in thousand pound suites like Dreamweaver?
Wouldn't it be great to have a UI with a single, coherent vision, one metaphor that ran as the basis of the man/machine interaction?
Wouldn't it be great to have an OS that invited hacking and tinkering, that opened itself up when you asked it to? That didn't try to hide its functionality behind cryptic naming schemes and a lack of documentation? And last, but not least, that behaved in an at least somewhat predictable manner?
I tell you, mates, we are being robbed! Robbed of endless opportunities! Robbed of sleep and our blood pressure! Of our way to make our own fortune! Silver And Gold!
...
the bit I find surprising though is that I would have thought since Intel it would be more or less the same - as I understood it the performance difference with Live was down to Altivec, which is a thing of the past nowb0unce wrote:you seem to be following me just fine mesmer.
I understand what's going on with bootcamp a bit better
Anyways, as long as I've known ableton live I've known that you get more performance juice out of XP - pound for pound. According to all the threads and anecdotal evidence that is. So I'm a little bewildered by the expectation that OSX & XP should give the same performance results on the same machine.... if OSX & XP deliver the same results on seperate but identically spec'd intel machines , then ya I can see why someone might expect their OSX to match their bootcamp'd XP in reverb count.....
otherwise, I dont see much point to figuring out why tim's XP is outperforming his OSX - it's always been that way in my mind.
y'get me ?
I'm not sure what my test demonstrates because I'm on vista not XP, but the results aren't too bad considering on OSX Tim got 12 reverbs, XP 16 and I just squeezed 10 on both - mine is a core duo 1.73 and his is a core (2?) duo 2.4 - so I would have thought the difference would have been bigger - well probably more like what he got with XP
so yeah I guess if anything it show with his setup OSX is the slug
but my guess is that is something to do with the motu drivers or something
I cant imagine what else it might be
we could really do with some more XP/OSX users giving results
unfortunately I flattened my XP partition to put on OSX86
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
Oh, OS X really is quite bad, too. And unlike Windows, it's getting worse with every update...forge wrote:I find that outlook quite bewildering actually - I mean I can understand you maybe preferring one over the other, but windows really isnt that bad - in fact I am that used to it I find it way more frustrating using OSX - and I'm sure alot of that is just down to familiarity
It's really not about familiarity, it's just about looking at what we have and imagining something better. It's too easy... But anyways, calling a user interface which requires six mouse clicks in completely non-obvious places to remove a USB flash drive 'not that bad' or has hopelessly crippled drag'n'drop is a sure sign you've used it too much!
UNIX is a really good way of doing things. The whole 'everything is a file' and 'many small programmes that work together through simple and consistent interfaces' is a great way of designing applications, and it's a great way of making a computer do what you want it to. Macs are much better than PCs here, mostly due to drag'n'drop, but there's a long way to go.
Anyways, this doesn't belong here. As you were..
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
noisetonepause wrote:.. But anyways, calling a user interface which requires six mouse clicks in completely non-obvious places to remove a USB flash drive 'not that bad' or has hopelessly crippled drag'n'drop is a sure sign you've used it too much!
not sure what you've been doing1 click for me!
there's a little icon near the clock, single click, choose the flash drive in the list then let go of the mouse button
only time you might find it problematic is if it's still in use
I dont really have a problem with drag/drop either
I wasnt a huge fan of XP aesthetically - in fact I puzzled over how they could make it look like that, but they have sorted out a VAST number of the problems by now and XP SP2 'just works' and has given me surprisingly few problems over time
I really like vista actually
I load up OSX86 and get overjoyed with the excitement of the cool factor of it being on my PC but there are still alot of problems with the PC hack that really make me certain I will use it just so I can access the Mac things I couldnt otherwise, but for everything else I'm happy
If Steve decides to sell it for PC I will give it a serious thought
I'm not even sure it would jeopordise their hardware market either - there's no question they make quality computers, I think people would still buy them first if they want OSX - the only difference I would see is existing PC users buying the OS