T3 - AES New Feature Preview
-
- KVRAF
- 1884 posts since 9 Feb, 2004 from Rochester, MN
That's a pretty easy one; T3 features were being decided back when dual-core was new therefore uncommon. Even if new PCs and Macs are shipping with dual core, there's plenty of older DAWs that still don't. So why prioritize dual-core support over other features that can be used by everyone?
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Work started on T3 before it was standard. And not all G4's were dual core. Mine isn't at least. But since the work was already so far along on T3 before things became standard, like dual core and Intel Macs, that it doesn't make sense to go BACK and make a version with it. So they are just working hard now to implement the dual core as soon as they can, and UB versions are already coming.
I personally think it makes perfect sense. But everyone sees it different.
Brent
I personally think it makes perfect sense. But everyone sees it different.
Brent
My host is better than your host
-
- KVRAF
- 2417 posts since 17 Jun, 2003
There's a room full of macs in front of me that are not dual core. Are you saying they dosn't exist? That will come as a surprise to the people working on them.ttoz wrote:I know it's beating a horse, but i still cant understand, since this app is dual platform, and theres no mac that currently exists that isnt at least dual core, that it was not initially considered as a MAJOR feature...it just doesn't make sense in any way. Even on the win side more and more are getting dualies. But it has been standard on macs since G4's!
It is also not true to say that it's been standard for macs to be dual core since G4s. This is simply not true.
I know it's beating a dead horse, but could you try to be a tad less negative and a bit more factually accurate?
"my gosh it's a friggin hardware"
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 26972 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
The majority of Tower Macs sold were dual processor G5's well before T2 even shipped! Likewise the switch to Intel was announced before T2 shipped. The Intel roadmap was clear. The dual G4 was available in 2001 which easily predates the existence of Tracktion altogether!koolkeys wrote:Work started on T3 before it was standard. And not all G4's were dual core. Mine isn't at least. But since the work was already so far along on T3 before things became standard, like dual core and Intel Macs, that it doesn't make sense to go BACK and make a version with it. So they are just working hard now to implement the dual core as soon as they can, and UB versions are already coming.
I personally think it makes perfect sense. But everyone sees it different.
Brent
Digital Performer supported dual processors in 2002
Cubase VST/32 supported dual processors in 2001 (Balancing VST's across processors)
Logic - quite some time now
Pro Tools - At least a year and it was not hurried because the high-end Pro-tools relies on hardware DSP.
Live - this year Live caught up.
Tracktion is the only significant host on the Mac that does not have solid dual processor/core support and will not have for some months if it gets it then. At this point, this is simply poor support for the Mac platform.
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
The fact that they were AROUND since 2001 doesn't mean that they were in the mainstream. Sorry, but even most studios didn't run dual core until this year, and a large part of them still don't.
The internet was around far before regular people used it. Computers were around far before most people had access to them. TONS of things are around for years before the general public used them.
And no, the majority of G5's weren't even being sold before T2 came out. I personally know people who ordered the original G5's when they were released, and T2 had already arrived. I was running it. And I specifically remember, with no doubt in my mind, when the Intel announcement came out, I was reading it on a computer that was running T2. It was not announced before T2.
It's funny, because when T2 came out, I don't remember many people griping about dual core not being included. And I don't remember many people griping that their Intel Macs weren't supported. Show me the threads where it happened. I bet you won't find many, if any at all. Why? Because NEITHER format was a "standard" when T2 was released. Both have only been in the general population since 2005, and T2 was released at the first part of 2005. If these things were available, that's different. I'm talking general public affordable and available.
Brent
The internet was around far before regular people used it. Computers were around far before most people had access to them. TONS of things are around for years before the general public used them.
And no, the majority of G5's weren't even being sold before T2 came out. I personally know people who ordered the original G5's when they were released, and T2 had already arrived. I was running it. And I specifically remember, with no doubt in my mind, when the Intel announcement came out, I was reading it on a computer that was running T2. It was not announced before T2.
It's funny, because when T2 came out, I don't remember many people griping about dual core not being included. And I don't remember many people griping that their Intel Macs weren't supported. Show me the threads where it happened. I bet you won't find many, if any at all. Why? Because NEITHER format was a "standard" when T2 was released. Both have only been in the general population since 2005, and T2 was released at the first part of 2005. If these things were available, that's different. I'm talking general public affordable and available.
Brent
My host is better than your host
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Oh, here is the official announcement of Intel Macs, from Apple's own website.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
They were ANNOUNCED in June 2005, AFTER Tracktion2 had been released.
Dual processors were available since 2001, but NOT in regular distribution. They weren't exactly the price they are today. And most people did not have them. The majority of Macs you saw until last year were single processor/core. I know, I bought one at the BEGINNING of last year. And it was a single.
And Dual CORE didn't come until October 2005, which is the "standard" we know today. That was FAR after T2 had been released.
Brent
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
They were ANNOUNCED in June 2005, AFTER Tracktion2 had been released.
Dual processors were available since 2001, but NOT in regular distribution. They weren't exactly the price they are today. And most people did not have them. The majority of Macs you saw until last year were single processor/core. I know, I bought one at the BEGINNING of last year. And it was a single.
And Dual CORE didn't come until October 2005, which is the "standard" we know today. That was FAR after T2 had been released.
Brent
My host is better than your host
-
- KVRAF
- 2417 posts since 17 Jun, 2003
No, you didn't. You saidttoz wrote: i said you cant get a mac NOW without it being multi of some kind.
Saying g4 macs that were dual-processor were available, or even common (which also isn't necessarily true) is not the same thing as saying they were standard.theres no mac that currently exists that isnt at least dual core
If you can't express yourself effectively it's not my fault.
"my gosh it's a friggin hardware"
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 2417 posts since 17 Jun, 2003
Better than complete bollocks? Yes, it is.ttoz wrote:there's no mac that currently exists in apples lineup to buy new that is not multi processor. f**king better?chico.co.uk wrote:No, you didn't. You saidttoz wrote: i said you cant get a mac NOW without it being multi of some kind.Saying g4 macs that were dual-processor were available, or even common (which also isn't necessarily true) is not the same thing as saying they were standard.theres no mac that currently exists that isnt at least dual core
If you can't express yourself effectively it's not my fault.
"my gosh it's a friggin hardware"
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRist
- 445 posts since 31 Dec, 2005 from Albuquerque
I think I'm gonna bust out the popcorn, this is pretty f^*k;n entertaining. 
-
original flipper original flipper https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8999
- KVRAF
- 2544 posts since 14 Sep, 2003 from Essex
HI
In all fairness I understand that T3 is still being worked on, so I would imagine the development team/coder(s) and marketing people would like to address some of the CURRENT technology trends.
To say that dual core support is not something that needs serious consideration is to suggest that T's development is operating on the premise that we are still using technology from 3-4 years ago!
I have mentioned it before; at least 2 developers introduced dualcore support (Podium and XT) in a ridiculously short time from FR to delivery: Podium was actually coded and tested for such support in a week.
This stuff isn't mega complicated (from what I can gather) and it is kinda becoming a base feature for many host programs now.
Of course; if you don't have dual coreand/or don't run up lots of cpu cycles with software,; you aren't going to give this feature much thought - it is pretty clear that many users are hobbyist's who don't need such a feature as they probably operate that computer I mentioned earlier; that is in the 3-4 year old bracket!
Flipper.
In all fairness I understand that T3 is still being worked on, so I would imagine the development team/coder(s) and marketing people would like to address some of the CURRENT technology trends.
To say that dual core support is not something that needs serious consideration is to suggest that T's development is operating on the premise that we are still using technology from 3-4 years ago!
I have mentioned it before; at least 2 developers introduced dualcore support (Podium and XT) in a ridiculously short time from FR to delivery: Podium was actually coded and tested for such support in a week.
This stuff isn't mega complicated (from what I can gather) and it is kinda becoming a base feature for many host programs now.
Of course; if you don't have dual coreand/or don't run up lots of cpu cycles with software,; you aren't going to give this feature much thought - it is pretty clear that many users are hobbyist's who don't need such a feature as they probably operate that computer I mentioned earlier; that is in the 3-4 year old bracket!
Flipper.