From: owner-sc-users-digest@lists.io.com (sc-users-digest) To: sc-users-digest@lists.io.com Subject: sc-users-digest V1 #294 Reply-To: sc-users Sender: owner-sc-users-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-sc-users-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk sc-users-digest Friday, May 25 2001 Volume 01 : Number 294 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:17:22 -0600 From: "David Cottle" <---@---.---> Subject: Battery disconnect; effect on SC Hi, I'm going to have to replace my sound module, which requires complete disassembly, including the internal battery. I seem to remember there is an adverse effect on SC, since the clock is reset. Any way to avoid this, and how do I get SC going again? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 08:34:14 +0100 From: nick collins <---@---.---> Subject: Strange scheduling errors Can anyone help with this? The code below crashes SC. I'm trying to set up nested scheduling schemes and don't understand why sched seems to fail if you ask for a certain critical mass of events. 15.do is fine... Cheers. //even more minimal error causing function ( { arg synth; var env, freqrand; freqrand=300.0; synth.tempo_(3); synth.repeat(0, 4.0, { arg sameSynth, now, count; do(16, { sameSynth.sched(0.5,{freqrand= (440.rand)+44;}); }); }); SinOsc.ar(Plug.kr({freqrand}),0,1.0) }.play; ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:26:08 +0200 From: Wouter Snoei <---@---.---> Subject: Re: Battery disconnect; effect on SC simple: if your clock has reset, FIRST set it right again, THEN start SC. Just make sure you don't start SC before the clock, and especially the date, is on the right time. > Hi, > > I'm going to have to replace my sound module, which requires complete > disassembly, including the internal battery. I seem to remember there is an > adverse effect on SC, since the clock is reset. Any way to avoid this, and > how do I get SC going again? > - - - - - - - - - - - -|- - - - - - - - - - - Wouter Snoei | Studio W. Snoei Bakkummerstraat 13a | J.H. v. Heekpad 3 1901 HJ, Castricum | 1024 BD, Amsterdam 0251 674447 | 06 54761741 - - - - - - - - - - - -|- - - - - - - - - - - woutersnoei@zonnet.nl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:37:14 +0200 From: sc <---@---.---> Subject: Re: Battery disconnect; effect on SC am [DATUM] schrieb David Cottle unter [ADRESSE]: > Hi, > > I'm going to have to replace my sound module, which requires complete > disassembly, including the internal battery. I seem to remember there is an > adverse effect on SC, since the clock is reset. Any way to avoid this, and > how do I get SC going again? > you have to set the internal clock correctly before you relaunch SC [after you replaced the battery] on my Powerbook it always jumps to 1904 1.1. the date of the birth of my grandma. maybe check the date of your grandma's birth nicholas ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 07:04:21 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: Battery disconnect; effect on SC on 5/22/01 4:26 AM, Wouter Snoei at woutersnoei@zonnet.nl wrote: > simple: > > if your clock has reset, FIRST set it right again, THEN start SC. Just make > sure you don't start SC before the clock, and especially the date, is on the > right time. If you did happen to restart SC first, then I will need to provide you a new serial number. - --- james mccartney james@audiosynth.com SuperCollider - a real time synthesis programming language for the PowerMac. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 08:50:20 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: Strange scheduling errors This is a bug. It is fixed in v 3. - --- james mccartney james@audiosynth.com SuperCollider - a real time synthesis programming language for the PowerMac. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:58:24 +0200 From: Wouter Snoei <---@---.---> Subject: old G3 versus PB-G4 Hi, I recently wrote a patch to run on an old 266MHz G3. The patch involved some noise functions, a few playbufs and MIDI controllers. I used soundmanager for i/o. On my 400MHz G4 powerbook the patch took about 35% peaks. On the G3 it took 55%... Looking at the mhz ratio this is what one would expect but...shouldn't the G4 be some 30% faster? Wouter - - - - - - - - - - - -|- - - - - - - - - - - Wouter Snoei | Studio W. Snoei Bakkummerstraat 13a | J.H. v. Heekpad 3 1901 HJ, Castricum | 1024 BD, Amsterdam 0251 674447 | 06 54761741 - - - - - - - - - - - -|- - - - - - - - - - - woutersnoei@zonnet.nl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:25:25 -0600 From: "David Cottle" <---@---.---> Subject: Re: Battery disconnect; effect on SC Hi, > am [DATUM] schrieb David Cottle unter [ADRESSE]: > >> I'm going to have to replace my sound module, which requires complete [...] >> how do I get SC going again? >> [...] > on my Powerbook it always jumps to 1904 1.1. the date of the birth of my > grandma. > maybe check the date of your grandma's birth Serendipity: "God in the machine." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 23:35:46 +0200 From: Alessandro Fogar <---@---.---> Subject: Re: CD Audio routing YES, I agree but my goal was to use the Hammerfall DACs which are much better than the Mac standard audio ones, if I conect the audio output of the Mac the sound is already not so good. On the Pc I could connect the internal SPDIF input of the Hammerfall to the internal Spdif output of the CD player. On the Mac I think this is not possible... Cheers - ------------------------------------------------------- /\ Alessandro Fogar mailto:sfogar@inwind.it / \ / Electronic Musician Software Developer \/ Grado (Go) / Italy http://www.fogar.it - ------------------------------------------------------- on 20-05-2001 21:45, Ronald J. Kuivila at rkuivila@mail.wesleyan.edu wrote: > You could play back an audo CD from the standard Macintosh player > application and route the audio output of the mac into the hammerfall > interface. The CD app uses SoundManager and SC uses ASIO. > > RJK > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:20:17 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: OT: Apple Store trip just a quick (kinda sorta) report back to the devotees of apple products. checked out the apple store in tysons corner, virginia. kinda reminds me of the sharper image, when the sharper image was actually cool. i really have no idea what apple is thinking. one of the big 'attractions' was some guy spending an hour showing everyone how great iTunes is. first off, it's free. secondly, there's programs like toast and jam which do the job much better, and are compatible with more CD-R drives. (and toast or jam won't destroy your boot sector) and who would spend thousands of dollars based on how cool a CD/MP3/straming audio player looks? then again, i've spent a buttload of money on apple products, telling myself each time it is a superior product. i just think the introduction of the Pentium IV will pose a considerable threat to apple. yes, RISC processors are superior. but if you can get a 1.5 GHz (or faster...) PC for a thousand bucks, why would you pay twice as much for a slower machine made by a company that has far less software titles available? apple needs to lower their prices online, and in their stores. the guy at the 'genius bar' was able to answer my questions. the entire staff on whole seemed well trained. that was the strong point. (although overly technical questions won't get answered...) i was expecting a coffee bar or something, because that seems like something apple would do to attract customers. and they could probably get away with charging you $7.00 for an 'Aqua Latte' as long as the cup had a cool apple logo on it. hell, it's an apple product, so it must be worth the seven bucks... the part that really bothered me, was the overpricing of non-apple products. (and you thought apple only overpriced their own products...) i was checking out the Que QPS drive, because it has decent specs, and they seem to have a good reputation. so... apple had the drive i've been looking at in stock. their (apple) price was $359.00. so i quickly hopped online (you can hop online using any computer in the store...) and found the drive for $220 using pricewatch.com. that's just pathetic. apple is still doing their bizarre memory pricing scheme, so if you purchase memory from an apple store, you'll basically pay about a dollar for each megabyte. since you can get a 256 MB module (for a G4 powerbook in this case...) for anywhere between $70 and $90, i don't see how apple can justify a price tag of $270. and that doesn't include tax, unlike the online store. they did have cubase and unity ds-1 in the store, which was a little surprising. no developer software titles anywhere. that was a bummer. i thought they'd at least have RealBasic since a lot of people seem to be using this 'language.' they had some books, but none of the new O'Reilly books i've been waiting for. the store also carried a pretty decent selection of PDAs (i think i saw all the Handspring models there...), digital video cameras, and digital video recorders. all overpriced accordingly. (with the exception of the Handspring products) the 'etc' section was seriously lacking. all the little odds and ends you usually end up needing at some point in time were missing. the selection was very small. as far as i know (and this is directed more towards jason mcmahon...) they had the iBooks in stock. they're really tiny. they kinda look like toys, which was a little odd. (not very 'apple' looking... i guess boxy is the best word to describe them) you should call to confirm, but if you really want your iBook now, you can probably just drop by and pick one up. most people there were just browsing. i picked up a spare battery for my titanium, and you even get a nice little 'aqua' receipt (the corners of the paper are rounded... and the electronic signature pad has an aqua interface, which is just a little too much in my opinion...) and an opaque apple bag. wow. steve jobs needs someone to give him a swift kick in the ass. if apple wants people to use AppleWorks, they should bundle AppleWorks with all their products. hell, even though i got a considerable discount on my titanium, you get nothing as far as software goes. (as everyone on this list is well aware of...) although i think the new iBook actually comes with assorted software titles. and according to the guy at the genius bar, all studio display monitors will have an apple (i.e. proprietary...) interface, as opposed to the current VGA interface. so you'll have to cough up $599 for a 17" studio display which doesn't include a VGA adapter. yeah, that will really help apple with their lacking market share... i think (and maybe this idea would flop) a programmers/developers area would kick ass. then you could meet people in your area at the Apple Store, bring along your laptop, and plop down in the store and go over Apple's ass backwards programming schemes with a 'resident expert' willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince people it's a 'better' programming language... unless i'm missing something as far as the benefits of Objective C go) all in all i have mixed feelings about the store. if this is their 'big chance' to grab a larger share of the market, they need to do some serious re-thinking. yes, OS X is a great (potentially) operating system. but it's gonna be a while until everyone rewrites their code to make use of OS X, and multiprocessor machines. so they need to focus their marketing strategy elsewhere. if you're not developing for OS X, or you have no interest in learning unix, the OS really serves no purpose for the 'common consumer' at this point in time. and the funny part about all of this, is that the newest iBook is supposedly the last G3 processor release. the G3 processor is already in the phase of becoming obsolete. (although i really don't want to sell my Blue and White considering how much money i put into the damn thing...) companies are focusing on 'velocity engine' optimized code and soon (sooner than one would like to believe) these software titles won't run on a G3 with any degree of efficiency. sure you can upgrade your CPU, but that doesn't seem like a cost effective solution based on the price of upgrades. so i would think twice about purchasing the iBook. okay, i'm finished my little rant. sorry about the off topic babble. just wanted to share my little experience with the apple store (and apple propaganda) to interested list members. cheers, christian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:40:36 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip Hmm, sounds like the ideal store for your everyday Gulfstream V owner.. - --- james mccartney ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:49:55 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip on 5/22/01 5:20 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > i think (and maybe this idea would flop) a programmers/developers area > would kick ass. then you could meet people in your area at the Apple > Store, bring along your laptop, and plop down in the store and go over > Apple's ass backwards programming schemes with a 'resident expert' > willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in > their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn > Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the > most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince > people it's a 'better' programming language... unless i'm missing > something as far as the benefits of Objective C go) The "pascal" declarations you see are only a directive to the compiler about how to pass the arguments to the function. It has nothing to do with what programming language is actually being used. Objective-C has Smalltalk-like method dispatching, which is superior to C++ IMO. Don't rule out Objective-C. Look how much code it takes to write a Cocoa application in Objective-C, then look how much it takes in your favorite C++ framework. The difference is HUGE. ObjC is not obsolete, in fact as far as OOP, I would say it is more advanced than C++. Once Apple re-releases the Objective-C++ compiler we'll have the best of both worlds. So on these points I think you are wrong. - --- james mccartney james@audiosynth.com SuperCollider - a real time synthesis programming language for the PowerMac. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:48:05 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip James McCartney wrote: > Hmm, sounds like the ideal store for your everyday Gulfstream V owner.. > > --- james mccartney hehe... i'm sure steve jobs has a few of his own. i have a honda civic. it doesn't fly as of yet. and i'm pretty sure it's slower than a 'personal' jet aircraft. gets better gas mileage though. easier to find a parking space as well. cheers, christian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:05:09 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip James McCartney wrote: > on 5/22/01 5:20 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > i think (and maybe this idea would flop) a programmers/developers area > > would kick ass. then you could meet people in your area at the Apple > > Store, bring along your laptop, and plop down in the store and go over > > Apple's ass backwards programming schemes with a 'resident expert' > > willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in > > their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn > > Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the > > most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince > > people it's a 'better' programming language... unless i'm missing > > something as far as the benefits of Objective C go) > > The "pascal" declarations you see are only a directive to the compiler about > how to pass the arguments to the function. It has nothing to do with what > programming language is actually being used. > > Objective-C has Smalltalk-like method dispatching, which is superior to C++ > IMO. Don't rule out Objective-C. Look how much code it takes to write a > Cocoa application in Objective-C, then look how much it takes in your > favorite C++ framework. The difference is HUGE. ObjC is not obsolete, in > fact as far as OOP, I would say it is more advanced than C++. > Once Apple re-releases the Objective-C++ compiler we'll have the best of > both worlds. > > So on these points I think you are wrong. i understand the manner in which the pascal directives are processed (and how they have no relation to the language you're using...) i just don't understand why they're still being used. i'm guessing for historical/legacy reasons. but i'm looking at code (apple's code) from 1999 that still have these preprocessor directives, and i'm not sure why they haven't been rewritten. that's where my confusion lies. (well, part of it...) i haven't used Objective-C. i've just seen a decline in support for Objective-C specific compilers. so you really think the programming community is going to drop C/C++ and go with Objective-C without any resistance? by obsolete, i simply mean i see much more C or C++ code than Objective-C. i'm in the process of job hunting, and i've yet to come across a company who's looking for someone with strong Objective-C skills. maybe this will change with OS X. i haven't been programming as long as you (obviously...) so i haven't seen as much code either. and yes, i agree that i'm probably wrong. i will be wrong for quite some time, until i'm right. any recommendations (books in particular...) regarding Objective-C? i looked at your code for the simple sine wave generator, and there's enough syntax there that i'm not familiar with which indicates to me that i need to read up on Objective-C. i'd like to see the introduction of Subjective-C. your code would never be wrong, but it would never be correct. it would be, subjective. yeah. thanks again for the feedback. very helpful as usual. cheers, christian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:16:54 -0400 From: jason mcmahon <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip I'd love to call and find out, if Apple had bothered to list their number somewhere, anywhere! It's not on their Retail page and it isn't listed with Directory Assistance. //bsom At 06:20 PM 5/22/01 -0400, you wrote: >as far as i know (and this is directed more towards jason mcmahon...) >they had the iBooks in stock. they're really tiny. they kinda look >like toys, which was a little odd. (not very 'apple' looking... i guess >boxy is the best word to describe them) you should call to confirm, but >if you really want your iBook now, you can probably just drop by and >pick one up. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:23:28 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip on 5/22/01 6:05 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > i'm guessing for historical/legacy reasons. but > i'm looking at code (apple's code) from 1999 that still have these > preprocessor > directives, and i'm not sure why they haven't been rewritten. Because if they had changed it, they would have broken all applications. > by obsolete, i simply mean i see much more C or C++ code than Objective-C. > i'm > in the process of job hunting, and i've yet to come across a company who's > looking for someone with strong Objective-C skills. maybe this will change > with OS X. i haven't been programming as long as you (obviously...) so i > haven't seen as much code either. Perhaps art music is obsolete because Britney Spears is more popular than art music. Britney Spears is a more advanced form of music since it is a lot easier to find her records in the store than records of art music. You can make a lot more money selling Britney Spears music than art music. - --- james mccartney ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:35:57 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip James McCartney wrote: > > > Perhaps art music is obsolete because Britney Spears is more popular than > art music. Britney Spears is a more advanced form of music since it is a lot > easier to find her records in the store than records of art music. You can > make a lot more money selling Britney Spears music than art music. > > --- james mccartney yeah, but britney spears is hot. bjourne stroustrup (sp?) and most likely the developer(s) of Objective-C aren't hot. so in that sense, britney spears is a superior 'product.' i can't believe you used the words 'art music.' isn't that illegal? that's almost as bad as 'academic music' or 'academia music.' but yes, you proved your point. now where can i find a decent book on Objective-C and Britney Spears? cheers, christian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:37:55 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip jason mcmahon wrote: > I'd love to call and find out, if Apple had bothered to list their number > somewhere, anywhere! It's not on their Retail page and it isn't listed > with Directory Assistance. > > //bsom > info: 703 893 5055 they're open until 9:00. cheers, christian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:42:54 EDT From: JoJoBuBu@aol.com Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip >Perhaps art music is obsolete because Britney Spears >is more popular than >art music. Britney Spears is a more advanced form of >music since it is a lot >easier to find her records in the store than records >of art music. You can >make a lot more money selling Britney Spears music >than art music. Shes alot cuter than Charles Ives as well. :):):) Andy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:53:16 -0800 From: minty <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip [iBook] a note about the ibook good friend of mine just got one - its his first computer so i've been over there every day installing his software and teaching him how to use it. so after spending some time on the ibook here are my two cents: well first of all i didnt see any bundled software other than itunes and imovie. like you said, not great selling points for that much money. this machine seems to be way below par for apple. it has a g3/500 in it but sure don't act that way. maybe due to the slower bus and smaller backside cache but it is not a fast computer. ya know how every once in a while you will do something in the finder (like select a folder) and it takes a few seconds to catch up (finishing some other task first)? this happens to my g4s every so often, but kinda rare. well, it happens quite a lot on the ibook. enough to be frustrating. also... running twerk's drool_string_ukelele patch (sorry for the msp reference hehe) produced poor results. with only a couple of elements going (two loopers and two random sequencers) the gui reaction time was *significantly* reduced. which is weird because twerk wrote the thing on his g3/400pb and he rocks the hell out of it. actually his live patch is much more than what is in drool_string. the ibook is small and light and very portable. this is a plus. another plus - since the case is plastic the screen does not flex or bend like it does on my tibook. ok the titanium looks cooler but it is bendy enough to make me kinda nervous. bottom line: not recommended. save up and buy a tibook. you won't regret it. mine kicks serious ass. the ibook just seems flaky and not that powerful. hope that helps... peace ben - -- ben milstein mintyfresh www.soundmangle.com - www.elmconceptions.com > From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> > Organization: special individual > Reply-To: sc-users@lists.io.com > Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:20:17 -0400 > To: supercollider > Subject: OT: Apple Store trip > > just a quick (kinda sorta) report back to the devotees of apple > products. > > checked out the apple store in tysons corner, virginia. kinda reminds > me of the sharper image, when the sharper image was actually cool. > > i really have no idea what apple is thinking. one of the big > 'attractions' was some guy spending an hour showing everyone how great > iTunes is. first off, it's free. secondly, there's programs like toast > and jam which do the job much better, and are compatible with more CD-R > drives. (and toast or jam won't destroy your boot sector) and who would > spend thousands of dollars based on how cool a CD/MP3/straming audio > player looks? > > then again, i've spent a buttload of money on apple products, telling > myself each time it is a superior product. i just think the > introduction of the Pentium IV will pose a considerable threat to > apple. yes, RISC processors are superior. but if you can get a 1.5 > GHz (or faster...) PC for a thousand bucks, why would you pay twice as > much for a slower machine made by a company that has far less software > titles available? apple needs to lower their prices online, and in > their stores. > > the guy at the 'genius bar' was able to answer my questions. the entire > staff on whole seemed well trained. that was the strong point. > (although overly technical questions won't get answered...) > > i was expecting a coffee bar or something, because that seems like > something apple would do to attract customers. and they could probably > get away with charging you $7.00 for an 'Aqua Latte' as long as the cup > had a cool apple logo on it. hell, it's an apple product, so it must be > worth the seven bucks... > > the part that really bothered me, was the overpricing of non-apple > products. (and you thought apple only overpriced their own products...) > > i was checking out the Que QPS drive, because it has decent specs, and > they seem to have a good reputation. so... apple had the drive i've > been looking at in stock. their (apple) price was $359.00. so i > quickly hopped online (you can hop online using any computer in the > store...) and found the drive for $220 using pricewatch.com. that's > just pathetic. > > apple is still doing their bizarre memory pricing scheme, so if you > purchase memory from an apple store, you'll basically pay about a dollar > for each megabyte. since you can get a 256 MB module (for a G4 > powerbook in this case...) for anywhere between $70 and $90, i don't see > how apple can justify a price tag of $270. and that doesn't include > tax, unlike the online store. > > they did have cubase and unity ds-1 in the store, which was a little > surprising. no developer software titles anywhere. that was a bummer. > i thought they'd at least have RealBasic since a lot of people seem to > be using this 'language.' they had some books, but none of the new > O'Reilly books i've been waiting for. > > the store also carried a pretty decent selection of PDAs (i think i saw > all the Handspring models there...), digital video cameras, and digital > video recorders. all overpriced accordingly. (with the exception of the > Handspring products) > > the 'etc' section was seriously lacking. all the little odds and ends > you usually end up needing at some point in time were missing. the > selection was very small. > > as far as i know (and this is directed more towards jason mcmahon...) > they had the iBooks in stock. they're really tiny. they kinda look > like toys, which was a little odd. (not very 'apple' looking... i guess > boxy is the best word to describe them) you should call to confirm, but > if you really want your iBook now, you can probably just drop by and > pick one up. most people there were just browsing. > > i picked up a spare battery for my titanium, and you even get a nice > little 'aqua' receipt (the corners of the paper are rounded... and the > electronic signature pad has an aqua interface, which is just a little > too much in my opinion...) and an opaque apple bag. wow. > > steve jobs needs someone to give him a swift kick in the ass. if apple > wants people to use AppleWorks, they should bundle AppleWorks with all > their products. hell, even though i got a considerable discount on my > titanium, you get nothing as far as software goes. (as everyone on this > list is well aware of...) although i think the new iBook actually comes > with assorted software titles. > > and according to the guy at the genius bar, all studio display monitors > will have an apple (i.e. proprietary...) interface, as opposed to the > current VGA interface. so you'll have to cough up $599 for a 17" studio > display which doesn't include a VGA adapter. yeah, that will really > help apple with their lacking market share... > > i think (and maybe this idea would flop) a programmers/developers area > would kick ass. then you could meet people in your area at the Apple > Store, bring along your laptop, and plop down in the store and go over > Apple's ass backwards programming schemes with a 'resident expert' > willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in > their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn > Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the > most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince > people it's a 'better' programming language... unless i'm missing > something as far as the benefits of Objective C go) > > all in all i have mixed feelings about the store. if this is their 'big > chance' to grab a larger share of the market, they need to do some > serious re-thinking. yes, OS X is a great (potentially) operating > system. but it's gonna be a while until everyone rewrites their code to > make use of OS X, and multiprocessor machines. so they need to focus > their marketing strategy elsewhere. if you're not developing for OS X, > or you have no interest in learning unix, the OS really serves no > purpose for the 'common consumer' at this point in time. > > and the funny part about all of this, is that the newest iBook is > supposedly the last G3 processor release. the G3 processor is already > in the phase of becoming obsolete. (although i really don't want to sell > my Blue and White considering how much money i put into the damn > thing...) companies are focusing on 'velocity engine' optimized code > and soon (sooner than one would like to believe) these software titles > won't run on a G3 with any degree of efficiency. sure you can upgrade > your CPU, but that doesn't seem like a cost effective solution based on > the price of upgrades. so i would think twice about purchasing the > iBook. > > > okay, i'm finished my little rant. sorry about the off topic babble. > just wanted to share my little experience with the apple store (and > apple propaganda) to interested list members. > > > cheers, > > christian > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:55:44 -0800 From: minty <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip ooo i wanna be just like britney. she's my hero. you guys didn't know that she makes all her tracks in SC?? - -- ben milstein mintyfresh www.soundmangle.com - www.elmconceptions.com > From: James McCartney <---@---.---> > Reply-To: sc-users@lists.io.com > Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:23:28 -0500 > To: > Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip > > on 5/22/01 6:05 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > >> i'm guessing for historical/legacy reasons. but >> i'm looking at code (apple's code) from 1999 that still have these >> preprocessor >> directives, and i'm not sure why they haven't been rewritten. > > Because if they had changed it, they would have broken all applications. > > >> by obsolete, i simply mean i see much more C or C++ code than Objective-C. >> i'm >> in the process of job hunting, and i've yet to come across a company who's >> looking for someone with strong Objective-C skills. maybe this will change >> with OS X. i haven't been programming as long as you (obviously...) so i >> haven't seen as much code either. > > Perhaps art music is obsolete because Britney Spears is more popular than > art music. Britney Spears is a more advanced form of music since it is a lot > easier to find her records in the store than records of art music. You can > make a lot more money selling Britney Spears music than art music. > > > --- james mccartney > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:24:09 -0700 From: cramakrishnan@acm.org Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip James McCartney writes: > on 5/22/01 5:20 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in > > their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn > > Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the > > most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince > > Objective-C has Smalltalk-like method dispatching, which is superior to C++ > IMO. Don't rule out Objective-C. Look how much code it takes to write a > Cocoa application in Objective-C, then look how much it takes in your Besides, learning new programming languages is good for you. It broadens your world. I think it's as valuable to increasing your programming vocabulary as reading the GOF. See Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, blah blah. - - sekhar, waiting for Apple to revive Dylan - -- C. Ramakrishnan cramakrishnan@acm.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 20:36:10 -0400 From: Jeffrey P Shell <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip on 5/22/01 7:05 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > by obsolete, i simply mean i see much more C or C++ code than Objective-C. > i'm > in the process of job hunting, and i've yet to come across a company who's > looking for someone with strong Objective-C skills. maybe this will change > with OS X. i haven't been programming as long as you (obviously...) so i > haven't seen as much code either. You see much more Csound *shudder* code than Supercollider. Much more Perl code than Python. And much more Python code than Ruby. And hell, you see more Windows users than Macs. Cocoa is great. At work, I've been able to basically swear off of classic completely (yay!), and for the most part only use Cocoa apps. They run the best on Mac OS X, can communicate with each other well, and pull off some great hacks without the need to resort to extension hijacking or COM mischief. These same arguments (why do Objective C when there's C++?) have been argued for as long as the NeXT has been around. Maybe it would've been more successful if they had done a C++ based framework instead, who knows? But I've heard many people go on and on about how great the BeOS API's are, and they're supposed to be a great example of a good C++ framework, but that still didn't save Be. The following bit about Interface Builder and Cocoa is interesting: > Scott demonstrated how you can create a fairly powerful application with > Cocoa, and how Interface Builder works. This was not the typical text editor > example though. Instead he built a mini-iMovie. > > The app consisted of a several items: an NSMovieView that he dragged into a > window, a sound filewell (that he could drop a sound file onto), a scrolling > list, and several buttons. > > A pre-written custom object that handled the guts of the application was > archived in the palette as well, and he was able to drag that over to the main > IB window and connect that to the NSMovieView, list, filewell and several > buttons he added (Play, Save, Split at playhead and delete current clip). Once > this was completed he was able to run the application in Interface Builder > test mode, and had a full working version of the application. He dragged > several QT movies into the list, re-arranged them, played one and split it at > the current play location, dragged a soundtrack into the soundwell, and was > able to save out an edited Quicktime movie. > > The amazing part was that it only took him 10 minutes to hook up all the items > (including doing the demo, showing us clips, etc.). Also, he never did compile > the application, he didn't need to, he was able to test it in IB because had > an archived instance of the custom object. > > The custom object which acted as a wrapper for the QT calls, and provided the > controller layer for the application was less than 1000 lines long. i hope they release the source of that app, i'm very curious about how it was done. btw: got my new iBook today. personally, i'm loving the form factor. looks like something you'd only see on a counter at the Helmut Lang store. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:48:26 -0500 From: James McCartney <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip on 5/22/01 7:36 PM, Jeffrey P Shell at jshell@mac.com wrote: > I've heard many people go on and on about how great the BeOS API's are, and > they're supposed to be a great example of a good C++ framework No they weren't, IMO. And I wrote a lot of code for it. BeOS API was great for toy apps. What BeOS had was a good kernel and file system. The UI framework seemed good on paper until you tried to write a large app. It did not scale well. - --- james mccartney james@audiosynth.com SuperCollider - a real time synthesis programming language for the PowerMac. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:45:34 -0400 From: christian adam hresko <---@---.---> Subject: Re: OT: Apple Store trip cramakrishnan@acm.org wrote: > James McCartney writes: > > on 5/22/01 5:20 PM, christian adam hresko at godpup@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > willing to answer code-related questions. (yes, the Pascal functions in > > > their C/C++ programs still bothers me, and why should i have to learn > > > Objective C, which is pretty much obsolete and no longer used for the > > > most part... even if you rename it 'Cocoa' that's not going to convince > > > > Objective-C has Smalltalk-like method dispatching, which is superior to C++ > > IMO. Don't rule out Objective-C. Look how much code it takes to write a > > Cocoa application in Objective-C, then look how much it takes in your > > Besides, learning new programming languages is good for you. It > broadens your world. I think it's as valuable to increasing your > programming vocabulary as reading the GOF. See Sapir-Whorf > hypothesis, blah blah. > > - sekhar, waiting for Apple to revive Dylan > > -- > C. Ramakrishnan cramakrishnan@acm.org yes, i agree. but sometimes it just seems like people use certain languages for the sake of being 'exclusive.' the macintosh community (illustrated wonderfully on this list...) sorta has this 'piss off' attitude which nearly destroyed the company. of course that had more to do with the whole 'you're not welcome here' attitude that apple carried around for a good decade or so. so now there's Objective-C. i'm sure i can find X number of people who think Obj-C is superior and i could also find X number of people who think C++ is superior. in that sense, i don't think i'm wrong. however, i haven't programmed in Obj-C (yet) so i've yet to draw my own conclusion(s). and some people are in a position where they can turn their backs to larger companies, but i need to be practical. sure i could learn smalltalk, Obj-C, and let's say Python. but i can't be 'picky' at this point in time. MOTU, Steinberg, and NI are using C++. i'm not sure how i could be of any use to those companies using smalltalk, Obj-C, and/or Python. right now i have bills to pay. i have plenty of time to broaden my world... and one day damnit, i'm gonna be right about something. cheers, christian ------------------------------ End of sc-users-digest V1 #294 ******************************