HEHE cant resist... A Sour Apple

[jcskid]

A Sour Apple The Better Business Bureau says, "No, Steven, you don't have the fastest PC in the world and you can't say so." We explain why Macsters have to be told such nonsense, and warn that the same disease that affects them is infecting our world, too.

 

http://www.overclockers.com/tips00555/

 

sorry the devil made me do it!

 

Scott

[doc taz]

I understand the point very clearly here. It's something I've been tolerating for years now. My graphic designer bro from Savannah, is exactly like this. Yes, he does recognize it, and I do, too. He's the owner of a PowerMac9600, upgraded to a g3 processor, and a Wall Street Powerbook.

 

He also owns a Newton, which is a large, brick sized PDA (personal digital assistant) that came out in the early 1990's. Umm, okay, yes, I do understand that it was well ahead of its time, and people are still making programs for it. But, hey, come on now! It's clearly old, and I don't want to carry something like that to a club.

 

One might say, "Well, so what, Doc? Your computer isn't all that special, either!" Exactly. I DON'T CARE. I don't carry my geekiness on my sleeve, and you probably shouldn't either. Just my 2 cuppa joes.

[Salyphus]

What a pathetic article.

[theblue1]

Apple's G5 "World's Fastest" TV adverts were banned in the UK for false advertising as well.

 

slashdot

 

What fried me lately was the media fuss over Apple's Garageband loop-music software. Anyone whose been around knows that it's an elaborate knockoff of ACID, the Windows program introduced six years ago, in 1998, that popularized loop-based production and introduced automatic time/pitch shifting to the mass market.

 

Garageband adds "virtual instruments" but little else, copying the ACID interface almost knob for knob. Two of my GB-using [and enjoying] Mac friends who've seen (the several year old) ACID Pro 3 on my laptop said "It's exactly like Garageband." Or actually, vice versa.

 

Anyhow, the media has briefly went nuts over Garageband. Macworld called it "revolutionary." A number of mainstream pubs called it "innovative." Electronic Musician managed to write a whole article on it without mentioning ACID once (except to note that it can open ACID files.) NPR had a lengthy piece on David Was trying out GB that gushed shamelessly about it.

 

Yet there's absolutely nothing innovative about GB at all, except perhaps that it adds some soft synths to the basic ACID toolset.

 

It's not even the first loop production tool on the Mac, being preceded by Ableton Live and loop modules in multi-tracking software.

 

Oh, one other thing about Garageband -- according to both my friends and a couple articles and BB posts I've read -- it's a huge CPU hog. My buddy with a 1.25 dual-G4 could only get 6 linear audio tracks (and one loop) out before he started having problems. My other friend, with a new eMac was able to get a few more for some reason.

 

I decided to see how many linear tracks I could get out of ACID Pro 3 -- on my old Penitum 3 500 mHz desktop machine -- a machine with a CPU speed 1/6th that of current Pentiums. I started with the demo that came with it, a 12 loop/track piece, and began adding two minute linear tracks. I ran out of time -- but not computer -- when I got up to 20 audio tracks (stereo tracks -- like the GB tracks in my friends projects), on top of the 12 loops. I'm going to try to get back to that experiment soon. The project file is taking up over 400 MB of HD space.

[Salyphus]

We had that discussion here FWIW.

[Salyphus]

Oh, one other thing about Garageband -- according to both my friends and a couple articles and BB posts I've read -- it's a huge CPU hog. My buddy with a 1.25 dual-G4 could only get 6 linear audio tracks (and one loop) out before he started having problems. My other friend, with a new eMac was able to get a few more for some reason.

That's not at all indicative the way the software performs in my experience. I'm on a dual-867 and have WAY more tracks than that including AudioUnit plugins (software FX and virtual instruments) as well as the built-in instruments.

 

It doesn't replace DAW software and it isn't intended to, but it absolutely rocks at what it does.

[theblue1]

Thanks, Salodious. I'm afraid I became obsessed with the issue for a few days. When NPR's Day to Day program did a long piece on "modern computer software that's revolutionizing music production" (or something very much like that) without mentioning any software besides Garageband, I just held my head in my hands.

 

[Matt.Hepworth]

[Salyphus]

Hahaha, that is funny

[theblue1]

That's not at all indicative the way the software performs in my experience. I'm on a dual-867 and have WAY more tracks than that including AudioUnit plugins (software FX and virtual instruments) as well as the built-in instruments.

 

It doesn't replace DAW software and it isn't intended to, but it absolutely rocks at what it does.

Yeah... when I found out that my friend with the modest (but new) eMac could get 8 (stereo) tracks and a couple 'soft instruments' before having problems I figured something was wrong on my other pal's dual G4 1.25. But that guy's pretty experienced and has been doing video production on his Macs for years, so I figure he knows his way around. He also has Soundtrack, too, so GB wasn't really completely new to him. He hasn't mentioned it lately, I'll have to ask him if he got to the bottom of it.

 

And, yeah, they both really enjoy it. I've had ACID since '99 and never really warmed up that much to loop-based production -- I love the technology behind ACID, it was real gee whiz back then, but I guess I'd just rather construct my mixes in midi and record guitars and some keyboards in real time. I used to do a live one-man all-improv echo loop synth 'show' (deep ambient space music) and that was back when you payed dearly for every second of live loop time... so them loops were tight... I just got tired of things going around and around and...

 

But anyway, I've heard some great stuff done in ACID that wasn't "loop-bound," (there's a guy named Stik who does smooth, funky guitar jazz that you'd sometimes swear was a real band... but then you hear his real band and you realize there's a whole lot more chaos in it.)

 

Whatever the tool, no matter how simple or how sophisticated, there will be people who make great, interesting, original music... and then there will be a whole lot more who make dross.

 

[theblue1]

Originally posted by Salodious:

We had that discussion here FWIW.

Thanks, Salodious. I read both the thread here and the much more informative thread at OSXaudio.com .

 

That is the very first bit I've read that clearly describes the operational technology of the loops -- and I've read plenty.

 

And that is quite a bit different than ACID or ReCycle in terms of how the loop time/pitch/shift technology works.

 

Now I realize that what it is is actually a soft sampler/synth based production environment grafted under what is essentially a colorized version of the ACID UI (with the addition of the style-button panel and the helpful substitution of instrument icons for the ACID icon on every track.)

 

Under this model, what would be an audio loop with meta information about pitch and tempo in ACID is actually an extended MIDI object, even including FX info. (If I understood the OSXaudio thread properly.)

 

Now, I can see the flexibility of being able to 'break down' the loop into its soft synth/sampler and FX components. (That's one of the reasons I like using MIDI in the first place. I like being able to have more atomic control.)

 

But I think we'll have to wait and see how much that level of flexibility will appeal to the folks who are drawn to loop based production. If they even realize it's there.

 

Thanks very much for the info. You'd be amazed how long I was waiting to get this.

[phaeton]

you know...

 

At work we've got a whole lot of Apple computers that by all means *should* be faster than an equivalent PC (including some Dual G5s). I hate to say it, but i'm really not impressed.

 

Furthermore, if i set down all my anti-apple baggage for a minute, and just look at real performance, there are a *lot* of places where OSX falls short of all the claims. Overexaggerated marketing isn't entirely new or exclusive to Apple, sure, but there's a few things i've seen OSX do that really quite honestly surprised me. I figured Apple was better than to let *that* sneak out.

 

Don't get me wrong. I would love nothing more than to be able to buy into Apple's image of the "oppressed, intelligent but misunderstood creative/artistic type", but they've got a little ways to go yet before they win my vote.

 

It could be that i use computers in a way that most Mac users won't (which makes them fine for what most Mac users do.

 

Not to start a war or anything, but Apple falls short of Steve Jobs' raving lunaticism no different than any other company falls short of their public claims of greatness.

[Alon]

Apple Garageband is similiar to Sony Acid ? No shit.

 

They were both made by the same dude, no ?

 

alon

[Groovepusher Sly]

To all who've posted above. Don't like Macs, don't buy Macs.

Just stick with your much faster, more powerful, and more sophisticated PC's, and let Mac owners worry about how slow their machines are.

Maybe Mac owners just like to take their time, think and contemplate the wonder of the universe, take in the scenery instead of just wizzing by, smell the roses, etc.

And the slooower Apple makes the machines the more time they have for such pursuits of the mind and spirit.

I still occasionally break out my SE30 for those times when I want to remember how simple, life really is.

 

Sly

[not Cereal]

geez, thats the thickest shit i have ever waded through groovepusher.

[Rog]

I don't understand why PC users always feel the need to take the piss out of Macs.

 

Or maybe I do?

 

Maybe PC users are secretly bothered by people who choose to not use PCs in favour of something else?

 

Maybe they worry sometimes that they're missing out on something they don't completely understand?

 

Maybe they sometimes hate themselves for going with the crowd?

 

Maybe they feel that they're doing a disservice to the artistic, sentitive side of themselves by refusing to buy machines which are great to look at as well as functional?

 

Or maybe they just have REALLY small dicks?

 

It's a mystery allright.

[offramp]

...and meanwhile...precious, irretrievable minutes of your lives have been wasted on a meaningless, pointless argument...

[phaeton]

Well Rog, i've got a really small dick, but I don't abhorrently *hate* Macs. Whenever someone asks me for a recommendation "SHOULD I GET A DELL OR A GATEWAY!?!?" it tell them to go Apple all the way. I don't recommend anything to anyone that could potentially run Microsoft Windows.

 

It makes me a small-dicked hypocrite i know, because I don't have a Mac myself. But thenagain, I also don't use Microsoft Windows.

 

It's surprising how much differently (read:better) a PC behaves without Windows on it.

 

Each time i was in the market for a computer purchase i considered Macs also. I read up on them, went to the stores, checked them out, etc. But each time (thusfar) i've found legitimate reasons (aside from all the stupid ones) to chose something else.

 

For the record, I would *never* buy a PC off the shelf, but that's just me.

[Rog]

I admire your honesty Phaeton

 

I dunno ... can't we just all get along and club together to take the piss out of people who frottage tap tuned archtops instead?

[theblue1]

I'm with Groovepusher on this one. Speed is not by any means the be all and end all of computing (at least within reasonable parameters). More important is having a machine that works in a way that's comfortable for you. For many of us it's a Windows machine; for others a Mac.

 

I think Steve Jobs deserves a huge amount of credit for dragging Apple into the modern era of multi-threaded, preemptive multi-tasking OS's. Grafting an Apple designed GUI onto UNIX and then building multimedia layers into the OS to handle multichannel audio, MIDI, and a plug-in API for fx and utilities (as Windows has offered since '96) was not just a best-of-both-worlds solution, but crucial to the company's survival.

 

Now... the untoward glee that some of us have shown in this thread is more related, I suspect, to Apple's considerably less admirable habit of fudging their performance claims, cherrypicking benchmark results, and sometimes just outright lying, as both the BBC and the US Better Business Bureau have indicated.

[theblue1]

And then, some of the untoward glee is related to guys like Rog...

 

Originally posted by Rog:

I don't understand why PC users always feel the need to take the piss out of Macs.

 

Or maybe I do?

 

Maybe PC users are secretly bothered by people who choose to not use PCs in favour of something else?

I'm actually happy to see people use different platforms. A diverse computer market is good for all of us. I'm a firm believer in competition. I'm rooting for the Mac to push the envelope forward.

 

 

Maybe they worry sometimes that they're missing out on something they don't completely understand?

I used to worry about that and that's why I started researching the Mac. I wanted to make sure I wasn't making a mistake. I'd been running a dual ADAT studio and used those to move to direct-to-HD recording in '96 on my PC -- the ADATs as converters via lightpipe. When the ADAT's started going blinky in 2000 (they were old, from '92 and '93) I looked into maybe DP or Logic on the Mac. But I just didn't feel comfortable with a platform where one company controled both the hardware and the OS (and now key applications).

 

Anyhow, I continued studying up on the Mac and realized that, though there were obviously great apps, that the OS itself was way behind the times and had no built in OS level support for audio/multimedia developers (hence the necessity of OMS and proprietary multichannel audio solutions). OS X changed everything, especially as Jaguar and Panther added those much needed layers.

 

Maybe they sometimes hate themselves for going with the crowd?

I like open standards. I build my own boxes (at least on the desktop). And if there was the same kind of OS level support for multimedia/audio/MIDI as OS X and Windows I would strongly consider making the jump to Linux.

 

The "crowd" is irrelevant to me.

 

Maybe they feel that they're doing a disservice to the artistic, sentitive side of themselves by refusing to buy machines which are great to look at as well as functional?

 

Or maybe they just have REALLY small dicks?

 

It's a mystery allright.

Now, I do think the G5 is the most handsome computer case I've ever seen. I hated the Capt. Nemo on X look of the G4's -- but I thought the internal engineering was quite handsome and functional. In fact, I care about the inside a lot -- but the outside matters little to me. It's out of sight and out of the way, anyhow, in my studio/office.

 

And, frankly, I find it hard to conceive that even a groovy looking retro-industrial 70s case like the G5 will make anyone more creative.

 

And, while I'm not sure my artistic side is all that sensitive, it was thriving just fine for a long time before I got a computer (1986), back when I used a typewriter and a four track reel recorder.

 

At first I just used my PC for business (database design) and for graphics.

 

Around '90 I looked at my wavetable keyboard (Kawai K4) and my PC and said, hmmm... all I need to do is hook this to that and... From there there was no going back as the computer slowly but surely worked it's way into another facet of my life.

 

I started yoking the ADATs and my PC based sequencer (MasterTracks Pro!) together in '92, I designed my first web pages in '95 and put a 17 second music clip up. The next year I started recording audio directly on the computer using Cakewalk (MasterTracks dried up and blew away. It was always kind of awkward but I was sad to see them not make the cut.)

 

I integrated a CD recorder into my setup back when CD blanks still cost $18 a piece. But it meant I didn't have to send clients home with crappy cassette mixes. I mastered my first CD for commercial replication not long after -- and designed the cover as well. I bought my first digital camera the day Windows 98 came out and have been shooting on a number of cameras since then.

 

Windows has served my creative side just fine, thanks.

 

Oh. And on that dick thing.

 

Making a comment like that is clearly not beneath your dignity, Rog, but answering back in kind is definitely beneath my dignity.

 

Have a nice day.

[jcskid]

sheesh didnt mean to start a flame war,

i shouda known better.

 

i just liked the part that Apple had to quit lying is all. i also had to laugh at who filed the suite.

 

sorry

 

Scott

[theblue1]

Not to worry. Some people just can't talk about tech stuff without mentioning the size of the other person's genitalia.

[KHAN]

That's why getting Mac users who have bought into the vision to acknowledge reality is about as tough as curing pedophiles.

The guy who wrote this "article" is an asshole. The whole time he was bitching about Mac users, he was showing what a dick he is.

 

I've seen lots of people from both platforms who seem to get much of their self esteem by flaming people who use "something else". It's sad really.

[Ren.]

Apple runs a very interesting business. They really don't sell hardware. Rather, they sell a vision. The vision is that of Apple being an elite computer company building elite computers for elite people. They sell status to Mac users

As a Mac user I'd have to say that there is some truth behind that comment. Sometimes the "cool factor" sells more computers than the actual specs themselves. So, AMDs are fasters? Who cares? Is estability you're paying for, not speed... just kidding.

 

I luv my mac. (is not a GeeFive)

[phaeton]

Rog says

 

I dunno ... can't we just all get along and club together to take the piss out of people who frottage tap tuned archtops instead?

 

Certainly.... but I say we get pissed first. First round of Bitter is on me.

[offramp]

tick

 

tock

 

tick

 

tock

[Groovepusher Sly]

Originally posted by offramp:

...and meanwhile...precious, irretrievable minutes of your lives have been wasted on a meaningless, pointless argument...

No, I'm just reading this and other threads while I'm waiting for the Mac to process this Photoshop file.

 

Originally posted by jcskid:

i just liked the part that Apple had to quit lying is all. i also had to laugh at who filed the suite.

You don't believe the hype do you? While companies and advertisers overstate and exaggerate their claims to suck in the general public all the time, I don't go for it. The G5's were probably the fastest for a couple of days, and all Apple had to do to continue running the same ad was say, "one of the fastest". Just like any other equipment I buy, I read the specs, check it out and if I like it I buy.

A G5/dual 2GHz WILL be the fastest computer in the world when it's sitting in MY studio. And that's ALL that really matters, isn't it?

 

Sly

 

P.S. I just put OS X Panther on my PowerBook G3/500 Saturday, and it's the fastest, now smoothest running, non crashing laptop in the world!

[Rog]

Originally posted by theblue1:

Not to worry. Some people just can't talk about tech stuff without mentioning the size of the other person's genitalia.

Lol.

 

I was only being about 1/3 serious but never mind.

 

I must use more in future.

[Alndln]

What's going on here?? Did I miss something????( )