How about a OS just for music making?

[memyselfandus]

There are many Linux distros like Ubuntu Studio, 64 Studio, and KXStudio, that are specifically geared towards multimedia production. They contain tweaked kernels to get system-wide low latency.

interesting... although now I'm hoping for something like this..



This ^^^^^^^ with a nice big monitor and keyboard/mouse

with the ability to run stuff "like" ezdrummer and Kontakt and all the other great plugins..

No computer AT ALL. How about.. F**k computers and the whole piecing together a "system" or over paying someone else to put it together with probable software or hardware snags when the os updates.

Going to check all that stuff out though. what you said sounds interesting.

[memyselfandus]

[memyselfandus]

Did anyone mention BeOS?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS

cool

[memyselfandus]

BeOS was optimized for digital media work and was written to take advantage of modern computer hardware facilities such as symmetric multiprocessing by utilizing modular I/O bandwidth, pervasive multithreading, preemptive multitasking and a 64-bit journaling file system known as BFS. The BeOS GUI was developed on the principles of clarity and a clean, uncluttered design.

The API was written in C++ for ease of programming. It has partial POSIX compatibility and access to a command-line interface through Bash, although internally it is not a Unix-derived operating system.

BeOS used Unicode as the default encoding in the GUI, though support for input methods such as bidirectional text input was never realized.

Initially designed to run on AT&T Hobbit-based hardware, BeOS was later modified to run on PowerPC-based processors: first Be's own systems, later Apple Inc.'s PowerPC Reference Platform and Common Hardware Reference Platform, with the hope that Apple would purchase or license BeOS as a replacement for its aging Mac OS.[4] Apple CEO Gil Amelio started negotiations to buy Be Inc., but negotiations stalled when Be CEO Jean-Louis Gassée wanted $200 million; Apple was unwilling to offer any more than $125 million. Apple's board of directors decided NeXTSTEP was a better choice and purchased NeXT in 1996 for $429 million, bringing back Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.


In 2002, Be Inc. sued Microsoft claiming that Hitachi had been dissuaded from selling PCs loaded with BeOS, and that Compaq had been pressured not to market an Internet appliance in partnership with Be. Be also claimed that Microsoft acted to artificially depress Be Inc.'s initial public offering. The case was eventually settled out of court for $23.25 million with no admission of liability on Microsoft's part.

[toine6]

[T-CM11]

How about a OS just for music making? with a new and better plugin format? no other processes besides the processes that run the Daw and plugins? No internet explorer. No safari. no nothing. offline.

Microsoft and Apple just get in the way. I wonder how many times Apple has seen a small upstart doing something like this and bought them out? I can't think of one reason why I wouldn't want a dedicated os for all my music making. No bloat other than music making features. other than the fact that I have no choice and have to settle.

Yes that would be great. I don't know what else to say.

[memyselfandus]

exactly. with today's plugin power.

[VariKusBrainZ]

I dont get it

[huhu_huhu]

I don't think the debate to be unnecessary, however with the power the new machines have I don't"t bother much.
I remember the time when the third L1 bring the whole show down.
Today, with or without D$P, it seems to have no end. Nevertheless I wish for a machine that perform at 32 sample buffer, 96K the as today at 256, 44.1k.
That would be my dream machine. I don't,t think it's a matter of OS tough.

[LawrenceF]

no other processes besides the processes that run the Daw and plugins? No internet explorer. No safari. no nothing. offline.

You can do that now with Windows, but the cost is maybe prohibitive because you'd need another computer to do everything else. You can strip down a system to only run the processes that are directly related to your music making and nothing else... permanently turn off all other unnecessary processes and permanently uninstall all other unnecessary applications.

I think some full time studios do exactly that and then lock their systems down so nobody else can screw them up... like interns installing freeware plugins or grabbing updates without permission and screwing up the systems.

That may not be a cost effective approach for the masses where many people are using their computers for everything from making beats to porn and online games though.

If you want a dedicated music recording and mixing system, buy a RADAR and a good digital console. You won't even need a computer... but that's a rather pricey avenue.

But (imo) Windows is a consumer OS. Just because it comes with a lot of random stuff turned on doesn't mean you can't turn most of that stuff off.

[jancivil]

I think it's the best idea. All of the OSes that do other things devote a lot of cycles to the other things.
For instance a couple months ago I finally caved and installed Mountain Lion. Snow Leopard was streamlined. ML is sluggish. At first it seemed if anything a bit snappier for the salient things, Kontakt loading faster in VE Pro for instance. Now, not only is that out the window, it took 14 seconds to get to System Preferences/Sound yesterday.
No, it's not my maintenance or anything, I have a cloned drive for SL, and it runs like SL runs. There is no isolating this or that for a non-expert, but there is 'bloat' in comparison, there has to be. I don't think having internet and a browser is anything in itself, though. I found that this computer being my single computer is about as powerful as it was as a slave with no internet. But ML vs SL reveals the issue.

Actually there is one OS which is stripped way down for, if not dedicated to, running plugins. It's a stripped-down Windows, which is not optimal IME. Muse Receptor.

I used to turn off all non-essential services with XP. I think it created instability in the end, though.

[LawrenceF]

I guess.

The question is, who would buy an OS like that? I mean, we who make music would but nobody else would so... what would be the motivation of the creator to make it when 90% of the computer using public isn't making music and most who are making music are already easily making great music already on Windows and OSX?

It's almost like spending years doing something (a good bit harder than making plugins) that you already know 90% of people who use computers will have no interest in... so it would likely be priced quite expensively to make up for that.

I do get the idea, I just don't think it aligns with the realities of the current marketplace. It looks to be solving a problem that may not even actually exist for most people. But who knows, maybe some independently wealthy guy will do it anyway.

I mean, Microsoft probably couldn't survive if only people who made music bought their OS. I'm not arguing against it, just trying to understand the logic of it for the person who'll create it.

[camsr]

Linux?

If you can rewrite most of it from the ground up

[jancivil]

Well, I don't have a survey as to the actual market for a dedicated-to-DAW OS (and hardware, NB).
I know some people brag on their low latency and performance with what they have, but I'm not interested. For me, the thing should perform WILDLY better than what I have, and I have a shitton of money in it and I'm a pretty good manager of DAW vis a vis OS, frankly. I think entering notes at full production-value can be at absolutely neglible latency and stable as a rock, and I think all of the issues are at the end of the day compatibility problems. Most of what people have as complaints on this board, I don't have, because I have landed on a combination of things that is relatively felicitous, not purely out of luck but from research and AVOIDANCE and near-paranoia. But the developers of my workhorses don't love OSX, dig. And the developers of the OS are mucking it up more each day afaiac.

So, if there was something better integrated when I had this kind of money to put in, and I was apprised of it and it seemed suitable, I might have bit, even to the tune of more than what I paid (before I took this here computer home, just the hardware came to over 9k USD. For a big pro with backing that isn't a ton of money I suppose, for me it is.).

[VariKusBrainZ]

Who remembers when William of Wusik was planning on creating an OS just for music ?