Given how things have gone down in the past I’m not feeling too optimistic about this.
Although in theory the forced upgrade to AUv3 support would improve quality and performance, I suspect at least half my remaining apps (that didn’t die in the 32 bit extinction) are about to become obsolete when this happens.
S’ok as I’ve been moving back into Reaper on the laptop but it srsly calls into question the ephemerality of software in general. For the combined amount of money spent over the years coulda bought some decent hardware.
Will try to squeeze more sounds from them for the time being tho. Record everything.
No, Audiobus will survive - the devs have worked (colluded? lol) with apple on audio before. I’m sure they’ll adapt.
Inter-App Audio is going away though, and roughly 80% of my plugins for example are dependent on IAA rn. There will be a ton of apps that die with the next release and a lot of ‘em will likely be the cool little weird one-offs that unpaid devs released in the past.
AU (Audio Units) is going to be the sole protocol supported going fwd apparently and while that’s great as far as performance and whatnot, it’s also supposed to be a whole other kettle of fish in terms of implementation so the entry bar will be much higher for aspiring devs as well.
Oh and let’s not forget the fork in iOS for iPad and iPhone coming out too… …Like many indie devs are going to be able to support two code sets at the same time for nickels an hour, right?
As I’ve said of late tho, my love affair w iOS is long over. There’s a handful of apps I still use and love but really want to go back to real DAW business.
Ye I agree. Yesterday I tried to make a track in GarageBand, I realized that there is no sidechain, and no proper eq. I tried using volume automation but that was super tedious. So yes I agree proper DAW’s are waaayyy superior to any IOS app out there.
I read the OP. Sounds like they’re mainly upset about lagging CPU development. That’s mostly Intel’s fault for sucking ass the last few years. Apple just refuses to use anything but Intel.
We don’t need a music os. An os exists for one purpose: provide the apparatus by which the user can command the device. Music is a userspace task, not an OS-level task. Any OS worth its salt will be able to support music software just fine.
So the cons are these:
Mac
Price too damb high. Stuck with shitty CPUs, although that may change in the next generations, idk. Apple has supreme dictatorship over OS distribution.
Windows
It’s not even an OS, because OSes are designed for users. Windows, however, is the user, and it uses human beings. User doesn’t even own his own computer. Costs less than mac, but still costs a lot of money.
Linux
Things don’t always “justwork”. You have to have some idea of what you’re doing before things will work. The kernel is a monolithic design, which may be a little less secure in theory than a microkernel design. It’s harder to install proprietary software that costs a fortune on linux than on the other OSs.
Now the pros:
Mac
Microkernel unix system. Apple may have supreme dictatorship over the distribution, but the user is in control of their computer.
Windows
Games or something, idk? It doesn’t outright rape you (yet)
Linux
It’s like mac, but with more freedom. The user owns both the distribution and the computer. New users can use noob distributions and have an easy life. Who even wants adobe software? Adobe Reader is Satan’s right-hand man.
One thing I love about the FOSS world is that there is no disconnect between users and developers. Not three days ago, I was in Ardour’s chat room asking “How do I send sysex data to my sampler to tune it?” and one of the main head developers of ardour responded to me. He said something like, “Ardour strips out sysex data, but writing a script to translate a .scl tuning file to MTS sysex data should be trivial.” And he proceeds to just do it immediately on my behalf, without any promise that I would reward him in any way. Companies like Steinberg, on the other hand, do not care about their users even half as much as this.
To add to that, the core of the OSX system is the darwin system. Darwin is an open source operating system based off of BSD. The unix coreutils that ship with OSX are also the BSD coreutils IIRC. So OSX is really essentially just a BSD spinoff system, with a bunch of proprietary stuff slapped on top. That’s pretty cool, BSD is awesome. And there’s PureDarwin (http://www.puredarwin.org/) out there, which is essentially OSX without the proprietary stuff slapped on top.
Imagine if PureDarwin really started to take off. Since it’s the same kernel, it should already be able to use existing OSX device drivers, and it should be binary compatible with OSX software on a kernel level too (that’s not to say anything about carbon/cocoa/whatever idk/other proprietary mac APIs). It could become a real, viable, FOSS, microkernel-based unix system. That would really be something. It would add insult to injury for the GNU Hurd (Turd) project lmao
…Like many indie devs are going to be able to support two code sets at the same time for nickels an hour, right?