Ableton Forum

I love this software. It is not a cheaper one. I like how fast patch and new version go out. I'm happy to know that a v.3 is at the door and I will pay for it if...:

...if it will be optimized for Mac OSX. I will not upgrade if altivec and specific apple optimization is ingored in next version. The performance is too low, realy to loow for a 399 software. And I as many other user support this software from 1.0. Now it's time to give us an optimized version.

Just my opinion.

I agree... We really do DESERVE a better coded Mac OS X version.
Clearly we love the program... we bought it.
But I come to this site almost everyday JUST to see if there is a better performing Mac OS X version...
Some are freakin out & cursing (bad actually) over the version 3 upgrade cost when we stll don't have a quality program in OSX... I'l actually pay up IF it works btter in OS X.
BTW, I do NOT have such bad performance from any other ap I use in OS X. Please Abelton, fix the Mac OS X issues.
Sincerely
rand

Yes a little better performance would be nice on mac. Or a G5 included for mac updaters. Just a suggetstion...

C

Ableton, please put the resources into bring the OS X version up to par.
I am happy to pay for these improvements.

K

I would happily pay for an upgrade that focuses less on new features and more on addressing current shortcomings.

-Alex

Seeing as they're calling it v3 instead of v2.2 would suggest it is more than just a few bug fixes.

I can't wait. I'm getting loads of new toys these days, it's just great! I love my toys!

-Paws

What will the pricetag for the Live 3 upgrade be? Has anyone an idea?

I wouldn't confine the wish for better performance to just the OSX version - I think the entire Mac side needs some attention in this area ----

don't you all agree?

Cheers,
formatnotloggedin

Please Ableton, mac optimisation for OS9 and OSX is a priority. I'm about to buy a laptop and can't consider to buy a PC when all my system is mac based. I would like to b e able to use more than two reverbs and a few tracks on my G4 800 or a brand new laptop !! I've bought Live form version 1.5 to play Live… live and I want to do it now !!

My subject was wrong.

Optimization is not specific for OS 9 or OSX, is for G4 and now G5... in a word "Altivec".

I can say more, with the new dev resource Apple have just introduced for G5, optimizing for G5 is equal to optimizing for G4. So... please... g4 and g5 in a single time!

I don't know how many Mac User have buy Live yet, but ignoring Altivec optimization now in 2003 with bunch of new G5 at the door means lost old one and probably don't attract so many new one.

I'll happily pay if Live 3 is optimized for the Mac platform.

I will also not be upgrading to version 3 if they don't add Altivec support and AU. I'm tired of software companies that treat Mac users like second-class citizens.

If it's better than v2, I'll upgrade. Better as in more features that I'd like, or better as in better performance, I don't really care. If it's good I'll want it.

Make sense?

I agree with you noisetonepause, but I have real problem with Live and performance.

The first example is the nice new feture introduces in 2.5, live as rewire slave. This is a very nice feature... the only problem is that Live get too many CPU that rewiring it in a program like Cubase or similar (for me Cubase SX) is just impossible.

So, new features are appreciates... but then we must also able to use them.

I repeat, this is just my opinion. And I write all this just because I like this software and the people that work behind it.

Aside from all the performance issues that seem to pop up on this forum, if one considers the programming math/science that goes into this piece of code, one would realize there are no issues....just potential.
In the early 80's I worked with The Pod System (developed by Barry Truax) at Simon Fraser University...this was granular in daipers. The amount of work involved in getting a decent sounding bleep out of the system was outrageous......Hours would be spent looking at screen punching in what at times felt like random numbers......wondering if one would get that sweeping boing sound to sound 'nice'. Not in real time kids.....wait time was the name of the game. Computational drudgery.
So when considered from this perspective, one sees that Live is not in daipers, Live is a maturing program. Well ahead of anything that was before it and well onto it's path of evolvement.
My point? Consider Live the Program from from the point of reference of the writers/programmers and not from the point of the user, and you will be truly shocked at what is being accomplished here. I myself am overjoyed at what Live has give to me as a user, and I am equally thankful that I'm not having to program/optimize the thing. It's doing wonders with zeros and ones that I would much rather not have to figure out.
The creativity and thought that has gone into this program honours us the users by allowing us to create so splendidly. So lets do a turn and honour the developers/abletonites. Consider what has gone into this program's development and then consider whether it's better to work with it at it's present state (wishes/complaints set aside) or whether it's better pull up your sleeves and get to work writing your own program.

Krzysztof