| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#441
|
|||
|
|||
SSJVCmag wrote: Hey kids, Can we get this stuff un-crossposted except to the linux folks? Actually, if anything this thread belongs in rec.audio.pro where it started. Thanks. |
|
#442
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article . com,
"Noah Roberts" wrote: John wrote: As for a home studio, the issues of ease of compatability with the outside world and lack of an upgrade path will limit the usefulness of any linux system as compared to more conventional fare. I have been hearing these arguments since I started using Linux 10 years ago. It is always, "Linux has no apps," "Linux is not compatible," "Linux is not..." Since that time I have watched it grow and embed itself, sometimes downright take over, in every market it ever enters. The arguments stay the same and time always shows them to be the nonsense they really are. Big wigs are constantly comming down on Linux, now they all want a piece. It will be the same with audio. the thing you are missing completely is that it is not the OS of any system that determines whether the tool application is most appropriate. the puter application is selected for the purpose and then whatever OS it happens to run on is installed on the chosen hardware platform. Worrying about the OS and then looking for something to fill the application need is putting the cart before the horse. As I have said before, working perfeshunnals choose the best tool for the job at hand. If/when any 'nix proggie stands up to the test, it will be embraced. As for the home user, imo, greater compatability with the outside world helps lessen the isolation and a steady upgrade path helps future growth. I have a hard time giving your statements about upgrade path and compatability any credence since you don't know anything about the system in question. All you have shown is that you know how to use the tools you ARE familiar with and have been lucky in who your customers are. lucky ? wow, them grapes be sour, eh... LOL -- Digital Services Recording Studios http://www.digisrvs.com |
|
#444
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article rochrist@REMOVETOEMAIL writes: My point is that you don't have to have such an attitude. I never did anything to you, or treated you rudely. Apparently, something about this Linux thing has got a major hair across your ass. I'm just getting a little frustrated with how great Linux users think the OS is for its own sake. I still haven't seen a good reason to switch, or even for a beginner to start with it when there are well established and well supported alternatives. Hobbyists are fine, but it's not their place to change the world until they really have something - and they don't yet, in my most humble opinion. And you don't have to be rude to me to annoy me. Frankly, I don't know who's been rude to me, but there certainly have been some bothersome innuendos thrown my way. That's not the point of this discussion. Take it up with my lawyer if you think you've been slandered in a way that can make you some money. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#445
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
Linønut wrote: Arny Krueger poked his little head through the XP firewall and said: Except the alternatives, which many of us greybeards suffered with before the NT registry showed up in 1993 or so. I'd rather suffer the UNIX alternative than the Registry, personally. What is the UNIX alternative? The Unix alternative is to put all the configuration stuff in the filesystem, so there's nothing to get out of synch. But it means more calls to open and close files. If filesystem access is expensive, this is bad. If the whole /usr partition is loaded into cache, there's no performance penalty at all and the maintenance headaches are MUCH reduced over the registry chaos. In the real world, the performance penalty is slight but nonzero and varies on application and system. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#446
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-06-03, John wrote:
In article , Jim Richardson wrote: The link to an e-book on using Linux in the pro field that they are writing: http://209.134.141.117/jam/book1.htm an unfinished and fairly mediocre tome as it presently reads. the copyright says 2003, do they plan on finishing it any time soon ? This also reflects a half-way attitude by the operators. BTW, "Jam" is a copyright protected name for a Roxio product that predates what they are talking about. Everyone seems to be avoiding answering this question. Who cares? Does it have any relevence to their professionalism as an audio studio? Yes, it does. Putting up half finished work from 2003 is very telling. The folks behind the linux Jam application are either ignorant of a long standing and widely used audio product from Roxio or are blatantly ignoring the Roxio copyright. Neither bodes well for the linux folks. Try to at least cite the right form of intellectual property protection when you blather on about this sort of thing. Musicians, Engineers and associated wannabes really should know better considering such distinctions are rather relevant to what they do. -- The best OS in the world is ultimately useless ||| if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \ |
|
#447
|
|||
|
|||
|
John wrote: The folks behind the linux Jam application are either ignorant of a long standing and widely used audio product from Roxio or are blatantly ignoring the Roxio copyright. Neither bodes well for the linux folks. You would mean trademark by the way. I believe they are talking about this: http://jamin.sourceforge.net/en/about.html It could very well be that the name was changed due to a trademark issue. I have always known it as JamIn but wasn't doing audio 3-5 years ago when it started. |
|
#448
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John" wrote in message news:are.you.crazy- the thing you are missing completely is that it is not the OS of any system that determines whether the tool application is most appropriate. the puter application is selected for the purpose and then whatever OS it happens to run on is installed on the chosen hardware platform. A bit like insisting on a blue garage as a criteria for what car to use. geoff |
|
#449
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John" wrote in message ... lucky ? wow, them grapes be sour, eh... LOL Hey, you got to stand next to Beyonce. I've never done that. jb |
|
#450
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roger Christie charter.net" rochrist@REMOVETOEMAIL wrote in message ... "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1117799063k@trad... In article rochrist@REMOVETOEMAIL writes: I used to have a fair amount of respect for you. That respect is diminishing of late. Thank you. I've never heard of you so I don't have any reason to respect you or not, or to care about what you think of me. But you have a point, you really should make it, and not make your discussant decide what your point is. My point is that you don't have to have such an attitude. I never did anything to you, or treated you rudely. Apparently, something about this Linux thing has got a major hair across your ass. When somebody refuses to accept advice on what he clearly has little experience of from those who do have real-world experience, and keeps repeating half-thruths while belittling those who attempt to inform him, it is difficult to put a point assertively without appearing rude to that person with erroneous preconceptions of an irrational religous intensity. geoff |
|
#451
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Noah Roberts" wrote in message
ups.com... All you have shown is that you know how to use the tools you ARE familiar with and have been lucky in who your customers are. Actually Noah, there's a relationship between those two factors. Sure, luck plays a role in any career, but the smarter you are, the luckier you get! Part of getting good clients comes from supplying what they want. Part of what they want is "industry standard" tools. You can't attract major-league clients without being able to do the things they want to do. (We'll leave the subject of being a really good audio engineer for another discussion! g) Even if a Linux audio app were all that (and I'm not convinced that any of them are yet), it wouldn't matter. The client wants to plug in his iLok and use his favourite plug-in. (S)he wants OMF import and export for exchanging session data (not just audio files) with the video editor. (S)he wants to take away a copy of the session to edit and/or do non-critical overdubs at home. "Compatibility" means more than just being able to open a .wav file, and "capability" means more than just being able to mix and edit. For better or worse, Pro Tools is the standard, and to attract the interest of pros, anything else will have to do *everything* it does, AND offer a compelling reason to step outside the comfort zone. It's not worth the effort to move to something new if there's no advantage. -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
|
#452
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#453
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#454
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#455
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1117829201k@trad... In article writes: We're starting to use Ardour at CCRMA. We've been playing with it since its inception and it seems ready for a trial run against ProTools in the next few months. We still use ProTools in teaching because that's what the students want to learn. Ardour will be available in the same studio as ProTools and Logic Pro and we'll see how it goes in terms of demand. With the Planet CCRMA Linux environment available to all, Ardour might just make sense for graduating students who don't have the money for ProTools in their home studios. I think it makes good sense as an alternate system in an academic environment. So do I. But a kid that can't afford a cheap version of PT, but has a car, a cell phone, an expensive 'puter, tuition paid by mom & dad, etc..... now that's a *real* anomaly. ;-) DM |
|
#456
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lines: 86
Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling X-Trace: ldjgbllpbapjglppdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbohm fpiljnanogpckofbcgpepmajljakaopcbkbdhgeenpejkpljfg fhblpipfahopgahfahiidcgejhaiakjlbbaelojkgfkbggmpil neogppkimn NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 01:18:40 EDT Organization: BellSouth Internet Group Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 05:18:40 GMT Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1177050 comp.os.linux.advocacy:1226339 comp.os.linux.misc:602597 On 2005-06-02 said: [2] A touch typist likes to keep his hands above the "home keys": "ASDF" on the left, "JKL;" on the right. While one can make nasty noises about the original purpose of the QWERTY keyboard (in very olden times the keys tended to jam; therefore the intent was to make the touch typist type as slowly as possible :-) ) it's what many of us are trained on. The only competing technology -- if one can call it that -- is the DVORAK keyboard. (I don't have comparison speeds handy for the two.) Either way, of course, the hands don't move much -- *until one has to pick up the entire hand and move it over to the mouse*. This is a pain, and slows a typist down; he has to locate the mouse, move it, possibly click on a button, then locate the home keys again on the hand that was using the mouse.[*] This is probably the origin of the users distaste for typing at all, unless she is in a 'text window' and can leave the mouse alone for a while. I've often thought the web service interface, where completing a transaction often requires shifting back and forth between keyboard and mouse to be quite awkward - same with many word processors. For its part Windows does allow usage of the ALT key. This key allows for selection of menus without having to use the wired soapbar -- though it could be more consistent. (It could be a lot more consistent in Linux, too.) Don't care that much, when I had a linux machine up and running before I took a lightning hit I was running slackware with speakup, a linux screenreader which supported my doubltalk speech card and allowed me to read the screen. NEwer versions of windows don't support the alt keys and the tab key for navigation as much anymore. My bitch with double clicking and all that is that screen access for the blind developers have had to incorporate "double clicking" a mouse in as a function using the numeric keypad and therefore forego such functions as being able to have your screenreader have a reading cursor which could allow you to look at the spelling of a word in text and even possibly (depending on the screenreader software) spell it using the itu phonetic alphabet. But it's highly naive to think that double-clicking is easier than typing. Such, presumably, depends on the user. You don't have to know anything, and the theory is that you can figure it out more easily. [*] The Amiga had an interesting capability, which might have existed on other systems. One can press and hold down the left and right Amiga keys, and the main pointer would be movable via the arrow keys. It was slightly clumsy but very helpful for those who didn't have a mouse handy. Windows has this still, I believe, marketed as an app for people with disabilities. I think there they use the control key and the arrows, which is handy. STill as screenreaders have to become more complex and update when you upgrade apps to support them more functions that you really wanted in your screen reader get lost. THis is why my lady's win 95 machine which we use for desktop publishing manufacturing our own business cards etc. will never get a net connection. I have no intention of chasing down bugs and githing the security battle. WHen I've finished building another linux machine it will get a dsl connection. OTherwise this old dos box gets its dial-up connection. Ftp works good, telnet is fine, web browser is too crude and rudimentary to be of much use with forms frames and java **** but most of the time I don't care. IT gets email so that I keep up with nws hurricane predictions and weather for folks at sea and get the things I want. I sitll plan on building another linux machine eventually, putting a Zefiro card in it and using it for transferring audio from other media and possibly burning a cd, but I decided that could wait, just go buy a Masterlink instead. I'm hnot that interested in gui editing and cut and paste performance editing. Richard Webb, Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La. REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email -- They can have my command prompt when they pry it from my cold dead fingers |
|
#457
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#458
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lines: 28
Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling X-Trace: npbhgpngjbkmjfegdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbofc mmhnhbanhgkihnfbcgpepmajljakaohiafbanepjdnjigjcmin edjmjemeieancgjhijfjaoffaekhpllbpcnbfjcpgfffoephfh lojiceiccf NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:11:10 EDT Organization: BellSouth Internet Service Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 21:11:10 GMT Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1177254 comp.os.linux.advocacy:1226643 comp.os.linux.misc:602715 On 2005-06-03 said: I wrote: I'm like MR. Dorsey, I'm not a computer fan for audio work in the first place. I cut my teeth back in the analog tape days and would still just rather mount a damned reel of tape and get some work done than putz with a computer. I'll give it another look I think. I, too, come from the analog tape days (on a hobbyist level with my old Fostex R8) and look at computer based recording as a godsend. I used to HATE sitting at my workstation cutting and splicing tape. DIfferent strokes. Had you read the rest of my post you might understand why I would say this. I don't mouse. I can operate a razor blade and a splicing block. I've yet to find an efficient way for me to mouse. Richard Webb, Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La. REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email -- Braille: support true literacy for the blind! |
|
#459
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike Rivers wrote: If I had that hardware, my inclination would be to use Windows XP and one of the popular DAW programs that a lot of other people use. So? Please find a better argument than one studio building a Linux DAW to support your point. (whatever your point is, if you even have one) I grow weary of this conversation and it seems you have decided not to actually participate except in a very beligerant manner. If you want to know what my point is just go back and read by original responses to the OP. I am not going to reiterate them for the thousandth time just for your benefit. The OP already got his answer and long ago accepted it. You winbozos are just frustrating me with your self imposed ignorance. Cya. |
|
#460
|
|||
|
|||
|
reddred wrote:
"Noah Roberts" wrote in message ... There are many reasons to choose Linux to do your work. Some are technical, some are monetary, some are social in nature. Linux can, and for some people does, make a fine DAW among other things it can do for you. All other nonsense asside. Not yet. When it has the feature set people want It has the features that I and others want. It is just too bad you can't accept that. Cya. |
|
#461
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lorin David Schultz wrote:
It's not worth the effort to move to something new if there's no advantage. Dude, I never said it was. In fact I said the opposite. Thanks anyway. |
|
#462
|
|||
|
|||
|
Geoff Wood wrote:
When somebody refuses to accept advice on what he clearly has little experience of from those who do have real-world experience, and keeps repeating half-thruths while belittling those who attempt to inform him, it is difficult to put a point assertively without appearing rude to that person with erroneous preconceptions of an irrational religous intensity. Talking about yourself in the third person is just weird. |
|
#463
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article a94oe.35159$9A2.13171@edtnps89,
"Lorin David Schultz" wrote: "Compatibility" means more than just being able to open a .wav file, and "capability" means more than just being able to mix and edit. For better or worse, Pro Tools is the standard, and to attract the interest of pros, anything else will have to do *everything* it does, AND offer a compelling reason to step outside the comfort zone. It's not worth the effort to move to something new if there's no advantage. From a facilities standpoint, compatibility also means going beyond having one flavor. the DAW list inhouse includes Sonic Solutions, Pro Tools, Sequoia, Digital Performer, SSL ScreenSound, Waveburner Pro (which will likely lead to Logic 7) and a bunch of other stuff I don't even think about. Systems we sold off years ago, like the Fairlight CMI III (what a cool machine that was) and the original Sound Designer/SampleCell were doing things the 'nix proggies havn't completely sussed out yet. It's also a moving target, because all these things keep upgrading, sometimes better, sometimes worse. Then you have to have people who know how run these and everything else in the room inside and out, while being pleasant to demanding clients. That ain't luck, that ain't snobbery, it's called the business of servicing the type of client you want to have. The second any 'nix proggie would show up as a viable call, we'd have it, but that hasn't happened yet. It's nothing more than a technical business decision, not an emotional bond or philosophical belief in a bunch of code. And if the budding startup home studio asks what sort of DAW to get, it won't be something relatively arcane but more mainstream so there is more available support and compatibility with which to learn and grow. -- Digital Services Recording Studios http://www.digisrvs.com |
|
#464
|
|||
|
|||
|
John wrote:
And if the budding startup home studio asks what sort of DAW to get, it won't be something relatively arcane but more mainstream so there is more available support and compatibility with which to learn and grow. Just when exactly was the last time you gave Linux a good try? |
|
#465
|
|||
|
|||
|
Noah Roberts wrote:
perso ha escrito: Hi I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based. Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but "serious" home studio ? It has done great by me. It has done great by numerous others. You can do pro level work with Linux if you want...it is up to the task and some do. Put it this way...if you don't like it then you can always buy something else. At least you don't have to spend $500 to find that out. If someday you grow out of it then you can go buy the later version of something better than you would have now. If you never grow out of it, or it grows with you, then you have just gotten quite a return on your investment. Just looking at it totally pragmatically the risk vs. possible reward pretty much makes it a given. If you are willing to spend the time and effort learning how to use a DAW the time and effort needed to learn Linux is negligable. The time you spend learning Ardour and such is time well spent even if you decide to switch because these topics are universal. The cost is nil unless you buy a box set, and then it is next to nil. For someone just starting I don't see how you could NOT give Linux DAW a serious look. What are the risks? That one day you might find that Linux is too limited for you and/or that you are incompatible with the people you want to do business with. So? When 90% of the skills you learned "playing" with Linux transfer directly what time did you waste "playing" with Linux? I didn't buy a $2000 gibson as my first guitar, did you? I didn't buy a $5000 Soldano as my first amp either. But, 15 years later... Most of the knowledge needed to successfully record music has nothing to do with the DAW. Of that knowledge that is about the DAW most of it is universal. So you have to relearn some interface issues, the fundamentals will already be there and the interface is going to be mostly familiar anyway. How do I know? Because most books about digital recording are based on pro-tools...they actually helped me find stuff about Ardour I didn't know existed. In this way it is much like computer programming...the fundamentals are always the same no matter what language you work in; there are few if any major differences. And what about that time and effort spent learning how to use Linux? Well, what if you find you actually like this system better? Maybe you will toss out Linux as a DAW but use it for a lot of other things. Maybe you will find that it is so much above everything else that any minor weakness in DAW is meaningless in comparison. Then again, maybe you will just know more about computers and operating systems...especially unix. It never hurts to know more things. You really only loose if you already have a major investment in another set of tools. Then there isn't any reason to switch unless you percieve a weakness in those tools. But price vs. features there just isn't much that can compete with Linux DAW; even if these major pro systems just blow Linux out of the field they also do in price. As a musician I do not even notice any weaknesses or missing pieces to the Linux DAW, much less be willing to pay an extra $500 to get said missing pieces. I tell you what too...Linux is MILES above these stupid little console recording systems you see for $2000 and up. This is what many home studios use and there just isn't any comparison in features or ease of use. You could build a pretty damn nice home studio Linux DAW for $2000. |
|
#466
|
|||
|
|||
|
-- www.blackcatcrossing.net "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1117816822k@trad... In article rochrist@REMOVETOEMAIL writes: My point is that you don't have to have such an attitude. I never did anything to you, or treated you rudely. Apparently, something about this Linux thing has got a major hair across your ass. I'm just getting a little frustrated with how great Linux users think the OS is for its own sake. I still haven't seen a good reason to switch, or even for a beginner to start with it when there are well established and well supported alternatives. Hobbyists are fine, but it's not their place to change the world until they really have something - and they don't yet, in my most humble opinion. And you don't have to be rude to me to annoy me. Frankly, I don't know who's been rude to me, but there certainly have been some bothersome innuendos thrown my way. That's not the point of this discussion. Take it up with my lawyer if you think you've been slandered in a way that can make you some money. Christ, overreact again why don't you? No, you haven't slandered me. And I never came within the same timezone of claiming that you did. You /have/ made a number of halfassed assertions about 'linux users' as though they were some enormous monolithic organism that react as one, and frankly, its kind of silly. I don't personally give a **** if you use Linux. In point of fact, /I/ don't use Linux for my audio work. That doesn't mean that I don't have enormous respect for it as a viable alternative to windows (which I also don't use for my audio work), or that it might not be a viable solution for audio work under the right conditions. What annoys ME is lazy generalizations and blithe assumptions that windows is actually something other than a awfully bloated, sloppy piece of innovationless work that generated virtually all of its success due to being in exactly the right place, at exactly the right time, with exactly the right set of utterly ruthless and cunning predators running the company. It also helps that they were marketing primarily to a country in which 44 percent of the population believe in creationism. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#467
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Noah Roberts wrote: John wrote: And if the budding startup home studio asks what sort of DAW to get, it won't be something relatively arcane but more mainstream so there is more available support and compatibility with which to learn and grow. Just when exactly was the last time you gave Linux a good try? approx. 9 months ago. it was a brief consideration when we were spoec'ing new mastering systems but there wasn't anything in the 'nix world to meet the criteria which included DDP delivery in Orange Book format as well as DDP on Exabyte and supporting the PlexToools proggies from Plextor and/or interfacing with our Clover 101. -- Digital Services Recording Studios http://www.digisrvs.com |
|
#468
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#469
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#470
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1117829531k@trad... In article writes: the thing you are missing completely is that it is not the OS of any system that determines whether the tool application is most appropriate. the puter application is selected for the purpose and then whatever OS it happens to run on is installed on the chosen hardware platform. Maybe one of these days someone will port Ardour to Windows. Does give me an Ardon whatever platform. But it could go head to head with the likes of N-Tracks, which is no denegration of either application. geoff |
|
#471
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Noah Roberts" wrote in message ... reddred wrote: "Noah Roberts" wrote in message ... There are many reasons to choose Linux to do your work. Some are technical, some are monetary, some are social in nature. Linux can, and for some people does, make a fine DAW among other things it can do for you. All other nonsense asside. Not yet. When it has the feature set people want It has the features that I and others want. It is just too bad you can't accept that. Well, I'm sure you're a big influence in the professional audio community, and your influence is growing by the minute. You know, getting people to try Linux is hard enough without guys like you making it harder. jb |
|
#472
|
|||
|
|||
|
John wrote:
In article , Noah Roberts wrote: John wrote: And if the budding startup home studio asks what sort of DAW to get, it won't be something relatively arcane but more mainstream so there is more available support and compatibility with which to learn and grow. Just when exactly was the last time you gave Linux a good try? approx. 9 months ago. it was a brief consideration when we were spoec'ing new mastering systems but there wasn't anything in the 'nix world to meet the criteria which included DDP delivery in Orange Book format as well as DDP on Exabyte and supporting the PlexToools proggies from Plextor and/or interfacing with our Clover 101. So which applications did you try? |
|
#473
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote: The Unix alternative is to put all the configuration stuff in the filesystem, so there's nothing to get out of synch. But it means more calls to open and close files. Is that the only reason for a registry? Are there any other advantages to a central repository for stuff like that? I've often wondered about "whence the registry." Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#474
|
|||
|
|||
|
Noah Roberts wrote: Talking about yourself in the third person is just weird. You really should take up some other hobby than advocacy. You do more harm than good for your cause. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#475
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi Bob_Cain, Unix, or maybe Win_XP, You wrote: I've often wondered about " whence the registry." Does Unix have something called The_Registry ? Anyways... Win_XP's registry is Hideously abused. My bigest complaint with Visual_Studio_2003 is how it keeps it's settings in so many bizarre places, including the system directories and the registry. This is a .BAT file that I sometimes use to transer my settings: C: cd "C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Application Data\Microsoft\VisualStudio\7.1" REM Must exit VS to save CmdUI.PRF and Key_Bindings.VSK XCopy /Y /F 1033\CmdUI.PRF F:\VS XCopy /Y /F Key_Bindings.VSK F:\VS XCopy /Y /F devenv.xml F:\VS XCopy /Y /F "C:\__\Visual Studio Projects\VSMacros71\MyMacros\__.vsmacros" F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\VS.REG F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\VS.VB F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\_XXX_.TXT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\Chip.TXT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\X.TXT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\Cola.TXT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\Save_Setngs.BAT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\Restore_Setngs.BAT F:\VS XCopy /Y /F C:\__\X\Bit_Stream.TTF F:\VS Pause REM More info at REM http://blogs.msdn.com/jledgard/archi.../05/67869.aspx VS_2003 has no way to simply port my settings from one PC to another. I'm seriously considering replacing VS with my own code, code that would be far more customizable, smaller and faster. And now, for something completely different... my virual girlfriend. Below is the lyrics and audio to Heather_Nova's Valley_of_Sound: http://www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/Valley_of_Sound.MP3 Move me... ... Don't try. ... Let the music... ... reach me tonight. Push me... ... over... into something... n-n-new. I've been riding all daaayyy on a bus... ... Just to listen to you. ... I love, I love, I love, I love, the look... ... in your trespassed eyes. I love, I love, I love, I love, the waaayyy... ... you can make me cry. ... ... Sink me... ... into stirred-up sea... yeah. Something I can dro-o-own in... ... Only you can do this to me. I love, I love, I love, I love, the look... ... in your trespassed eyes. I love, I love, I love, I love, the waaayyy... ... you can make me cry. ... a-a-ah, ... o-o-oh. ... o-o-oh. Fill me... ... up... and drop me down... ... yeah. Now... ... I'm alive... in the valley of sound... ... in the valley of sound... in the valley of sound... yeah... in the valley of sound... ... ... ... I love, I love, I love, I love, the look... ...in your trespa-a-assed eyes... yeah. I love, I love, I love, I love, the waaayyy... ... you can make me cry. Oha... yeah, yeah... in the valley of sound... yyymmm.... o-o-oha... in the valley of sound... yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah... in the valley, the valley, the valley ... o-o-oh, o-o-oh... the valley of sound... hmmm... yeah. |
|
#476
|
|||
|
|||
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 04:04:38 GMT, Tim Smith wrote: In article , (Scott Dorsey) wrote: I'd rather suffer the UNIX alternative than the Registry, personally. What is the UNIX alternative? The Unix alternative is to put all the configuration stuff in the filesystem, so there's nothing to get out of synch. But it means more calls to open and close files. There are other problems with using the filesystem. Probably most important is that updates aren't atomic, and if more than one program updates a given file at the same time, it can get messed up. (Worse, most Unixes don't have mandatory file locking, making it needlessly difficult to work around these problems). except of course that there are very few examples of apps writing to the /etc directory, most of them, don't have the permission. /etc/mtab is about the only one I can think of offhand, got any others? When I've needed configuration information that might need to be accessed and updated by more than one program, I've been sticking the configuration information in a database. That's been convenient, because it happens that all the applications where I've needed such configuration information have been applications that needed databases anyway, so adding a configuration table was no big deal. which is the way things like postfixadmin, or the like, already work. A config file, for the app to start off with, and fine tuned by dynamic changes to a db or the like. Additionally, things like postfix, can use db hash files (think /etc/aliases) which are rehashed when changed (I *think* the hash function is atomic, but I could be wrong) The app reads the .db file, you change the conf file, then hash it. Fortune uses a similar setup. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCoWYrd90bcYOAWPYRAkM0AJ4w6a1s/fneMSbACliLLlUB5DMkPACglxBt q2CjSs+5HuTv7LZtRQvptVQ= =2fMo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock "Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge." - Anon. |
|
#477
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#478
|
|||
|
|||
|
John wrote:
approx. 9 months ago. it was a brief consideration when we were spoec'ing new mastering systems but there wasn't anything in the 'nix world to meet the criteria which included DDP delivery in Orange Book format as well as DDP on Exabyte and supporting the PlexToools proggies from Plextor and/or interfacing with our Clover 101. Dunno about the Plextor stuff, but we run GEAR under Solaris and it works nicely... I think they also have a Linux port. You _can_ get cdwrite to make a DDP image file, then dd it to Exabyte. under Linux, the exabyte drive just shows up as a file in /dev that you can copy data to... if you copy a file over to it, it appears on the tape with an end of file mark at the end. And Orange Book is easy. The Plextools support is the real sticky point. I agree that is a dealbreaker. I got the interface specs from Plextor and I keep saying I am going to write an error monitoring tool, but at this point I am still using an instrumented Philips CD player that I built in grad school. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#479
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: The Unix alternative is to put all the configuration stuff in the filesystem, so there's nothing to get out of synch. But it means more calls to open and close files. Is that the only reason for a registry? Are there any other advantages to a central repository for stuff like that? I've often wondered about "whence the registry." Someone else pointed out the issue of atomic transactions, but this only becomes a big issue when you have a whole lot of things making changes to the same thing, which would seem like something you'd want to avoid anyway. Allchin came up with the registry after seeing how VMS handled a lot of the central configuration stuff in a database, and I think it turned out to be a bad decision, but now it's too late to do anything about. (Incidentally, some of this wound up being the reason VMS forks are so slow...) The one thing I _do_ miss about VMS is the heavyweight filesystem, which is itself a real database rather than just a collection of flat files. But everyone is getting away from that today. Even Apple has pretty much dropped the resource fork stuff in the filesystem and they only bother faking it for older applications. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#480
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Why Windows is Easier than Linux For An End User, Especially for Multimedia work. | Pro Audio | |||
| The problem with Linux and digital audio. | Pro Audio | |||
| Is there a non Linux audio group? | Pro Audio | |||
| Is there a non Linux audio group? | Pro Audio | |||
| Linux blows for any type of serious digital audio work. | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
