Re: WWDC, new announcements,fix QT & 16 months with Mac and back.

---

• From: bj <bj@xxxxxx>
• Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 00:27:58 -0500

---

previous discussion of this topic here at CSMA


Observations from a simple man . . .



1. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 20 2005, 10:19 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:19:41 -0500
Local: Mon, Jun 20 2005 10:19 pm
Subject: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them. When I decided to edit and transfer
my data and MP3 CD backup collection to DVD to save space, I found the
eMac iTunes better suited and more enjoyable for the MP3 task, but
without a DVD writer, I settled for iTunes on Windows. As for the
data CDs- Windows Commander, an alternative to Windows Explorer, was
markedly better at allowing me to view and shift large amounts of data
in preparation for burning CDs. I found no way to do this as quickly
and accurately on the Mac, although there may be a piece of software
I've not discovered that will handle this task admirably. Any
suggestions would be appreciated from anyone who has bothered to read
this far.
Recently, I added 512 MB of PC 2700 memory, around $45, for a total
of 1 GB and an AGP 8X card for about $80 to my Compaq AMD XP 3200+
machine, which is about a year old. This box has a fast HP DVD
writer, CD-ROM, 56K modem (yes, I'm still in dialup country,) lots of
USB slots, a 9-in-1 card reader and Ethernet. There is onboard video
and sound for those who don't need any more. It cost far less than a
comparable Mac would - comparable meaning a Mac with the processing
power of the AMD chip and slots for add-on cards - the only one
available being the PowerMac. With the recent upgrades, the
aforementioned Compaq machine is now not only as fast as an iMac, but
I've never had any problems playing MIDI files of any type on it
because it has slots and I have a high-quality Turtle Beach sound card
onboard. Most of my music software is on the PC and it operates well.
I have an older NEC 15" CRT display that is a disappointment compared
with all the Mac displays. But, for $200 or $300, if I choose to
spend it, I can get a 17" flat panel that will certainly improve the
viewing. It still won't be an Apple display - hard to beat them or
the Sony.
Speaking of Sony, there is a new Sony vaio system, for around $1600,
that is a 17" LCD display hiding a computer behind it. It looks
curiously like the iMac with the exception that it is black and a bit
deeper. Appears that the iMac is setting a trend for the all-in-one
LCD computer.
In conclusion, since I can't afford to buy another Mac, and since the
face of home computing is about to change in a big way over the next 2
or 3 years, I've decided to stay with both machines and work to their
strengths and see what the future holds. If you like the system you
have now and it works well enough for you to live with it, you may
want to consider waiting to see what the future brings - that is,
unless you have unlimited or sufficient capital to try every new toy
that comes out. Recently, I've seen a couple cheap $400 PC laptops
being sold as a house computer by various large electronics retailers
if you're looking for a laptop on a low budget.
How, you say, will home computing change? Speculating, Apple hardware
will drop in price when Intel gets inside. Future Apple machines may
allow you to run multiple operating systems - Mac OS X and Windows for
example. Steve Jobs may be about to make that Apple so appealing that
a lot of folks can't resist taking a bite. Longhorn will have to be
good to compete with future releases of OS X, so if Microsoft intends
to remain a player, you can count on them clearing up most of the
problems that have kept Windows from excelling - open doors for
viruses and spyware, system bugs, code that discriminates against
competitors (non-Microsoft alternative) software etc. Will Microsoft
turn the Xbox into a computer? Obviously, the smaller footprint is
happening. Mac Mini, Shuttle xPC, etc. Ultimately, maybe your HDTV
monitor will also serve as a computer with voice commands allowing you
to watch digital TV, surf the net or dictate a word processor doc from
your easy chair.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their
expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just
looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger

2. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 20 2005, 11:36 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 04:36:30 GMT
Local: Mon, Jun 20 2005 11:36 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them.

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."



3. Nasht0n View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 5:10 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:10:09 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 5:10 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Alan Baker wrote:

In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them.

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

Mr. Holy Inquisition has spoken.
Waiting for a reason why anybody should bother trying to convince a
bunch of biased and anything-but-objective Mac Nazis.

Nicolas



4. Rick View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 8:37 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Rick <n...@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:37:52 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 8:37 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:10:09 +0000, Nasht0n wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:

In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find that
programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the time
on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a Mac -
the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a more
enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP is
that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game or
other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not play
complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You have to
buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a soundcard that
can handle them.

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

Mr. Holy Inquisition has spoken.
Waiting for a reason why anybody should bother trying to convince a bunch
of biased and anything-but-objective Mac Nazis.

Why are you such a jerk?

Nicolas

^^^^^^^^^ - fix it.

--
Rick



5. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 11:07 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:07:10 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 11:07 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <pan.2005.06.21.13.37.51.457...@xxxxxxxxxx>,


Rick <n...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:10:09 +0000, Nasht0n wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:

In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not play
complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You have to
buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a soundcard that
can handle them.

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

Mr. Holy Inquisition has spoken.
Waiting for a reason why anybody should bother trying to convince a bunch
of biased and anything-but-objective Mac Nazis.

Why are you such a jerk?

I couldn't have said it any better. <g>

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."



6. zara View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 12:46 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: "zara" <zspook...@xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:46:43 -0400
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 12:46 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

"Alan Baker" <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message


news:alangbaker-CE6114.09070821062005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

In article <pan.2005.06.21.13.37.51.457...@xxxxxxxxxx>,
Rick <n...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:10:09 +0000, Nasht0n wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:

In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play
complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You have
to
buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a soundcard that
can handle them.

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

Mr. Holy Inquisition has spoken.
Waiting for a reason why anybody should bother trying to convince a
bunch
of biased and anything-but-objective Mac Nazis.

Why are you such a jerk?

I couldn't have said it any better. ."

You should be bashing fruit & veggies. He's the one who drew
attention to
this "odious" problem.





7. C Lund View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 3:02 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: C Lund <c...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:02:39 +0200
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 3:02 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <AjYte.113096$8S5.34...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


"zara" <zspook...@xxxxxx> wrote:

You should be bashing fruit & veggies. He's the one who drew attention to
this "odious" problem.

Fruit & Veggies backed up his claim. nashty did not.

--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund


8. Nasht0n View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 5:25 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:25:48 GMT
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 5:25 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

C Lund wrote:

In article <AjYte.113096$8S5.34...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"zara" <zspook...@xxxxxx> wrote:

You should be bashing fruit & veggies. He's the one who drew attention to
this "odious" problem.

Fruit & Veggies backed up his claim. nashty did not.

And did you ever even make a claim or contribute something of
substance
in this ng?

Nicolas



9. C Lund View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 2:58 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: C Lund <c...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:58:28 +0200
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 2:58 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <Mzlue.51299$Ph4.1402...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:

C Lund wrote:

In article <AjYte.113096$8S5.34...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"zara" <zspook...@xxxxxx> wrote:

You should be bashing fruit & veggies. He's the one who drew attention to
this "odious" problem.

Fruit & Veggies backed up his claim. nashty did not.

And did you ever even make a claim or contribute something of substance
in this ng?

You seem to have misunderstood what CSMA is about.

Nicolas

--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund


10. C Lund View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 3:01 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: C Lund <c...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:01:40 +0200
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 3:01 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <5IRte.50100$Ph4.1362...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:

We're still waiting for an example of a MIDI file that causes this
problem...

Mr. Holy Inquisition has spoken.
Waiting for a reason why anybody should bother trying to convince a
bunch of biased and anything-but-objective Mac Nazis.

Well, nobody's waiting for you to post your magic mp3 file. We've all
pretty much accepted that it was a blatant lie on your part.

Nicolas

--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund



Observations from a simple man . . .



Messages 11 - 20 of 60 - Collapse all
« Older Newer »
/groups/adfetch?adid=dzsBEBIAAADisXOHvnWxOE22rAA_47N3TQHWiC7y-Vq9SNxAy4S8Uw&hl=en

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


11. John Slade View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 12:43 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 12:43 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruit & veggies wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them. When I decided to edit and transfer
my data and MP3 CD backup collection to DVD to save space, I found the
eMac iTunes better suited and more enjoyable for the MP3 task, but
without a DVD writer, I settled for iTunes on Windows. As for the
data CDs- Windows Commander, an alternative to Windows Explorer, was
markedly better at allowing me to view and shift large amounts of data
in preparation for burning CDs. I found no way to do this as quickly
and accurately on the Mac, although there may be a piece of software
I've not discovered that will handle this task admirably. Any
suggestions would be appreciated from anyone who has bothered to read
this far.
Recently, I added 512 MB of PC 2700 memory, around $45, for a total
of 1 GB and an AGP 8X card for about $80 to my Compaq AMD XP 3200+
machine, which is about a year old. This box has a fast HP DVD
writer, CD-ROM, 56K modem (yes, I'm still in dialup country,) lots of
USB slots, a 9-in-1 card reader and Ethernet. There is onboard video
and sound for those who don't need any more. It cost far less than a
comparable Mac would - comparable meaning a Mac with the processing
power of the AMD chip and slots for add-on cards - the only one
available being the PowerMac. With the recent upgrades, the
aforementioned Compaq machine is now not only as fast as an iMac, but
I've never had any problems playing MIDI files of any type on it
because it has slots and I have a high-quality Turtle Beach sound card
onboard. Most of my music software is on the PC and it operates well.
I have an older NEC 15" CRT display that is a disappointment compared
with all the Mac displays. But, for $200 or $300, if I choose to
spend it, I can get a 17" flat panel that will certainly improve the
viewing. It still won't be an Apple display - hard to beat them or
the Sony.
Speaking of Sony, there is a new Sony vaio system, for around $1600,
that is a 17" LCD display hiding a computer behind it. It looks
curiously like the iMac with the exception that it is black and a bit
deeper. Appears that the iMac is setting a trend for the all-in-one
LCD computer.
In conclusion, since I can't afford to buy another Mac, and since the
face of home computing is about to change in a big way over the next 2
or 3 years, I've decided to stay with both machines and work to their
strengths and see what the future holds. If you like the system you
have now and it works well enough for you to live with it, you may
want to consider waiting to see what the future brings - that is,
unless you have unlimited or sufficient capital to try every new toy
that comes out. Recently, I've seen a couple cheap $400 PC laptops
being sold as a house computer by various large electronics retailers
if you're looking for a laptop on a low budget.
How, you say, will home computing change? Speculating, Apple hardware
will drop in price when Intel gets inside. Future Apple machines may
allow you to run multiple operating systems - Mac OS X and Windows for
example. Steve Jobs may be about to make that Apple so appealing that
a lot of folks can't resist taking a bite. Longhorn will have to be
good to compete with future releases of OS X, so if Microsoft intends
to remain a player, you can count on them clearing up most of the
problems that have kept Windows from excelling - open doors for
viruses and spyware, system bugs, code that discriminates against
competitors (non-Microsoft alternative) software etc. Will Microsoft
turn the Xbox into a computer? Obviously, the smaller footprint is
happening. Mac Mini, Shuttle xPC, etc. Ultimately, maybe your HDTV
monitor will also serve as a computer with voice commands allowing you
to watch digital TV, surf the net or dictate a word processor doc from
your easy chair.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between
Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

On Jun 21 2005, 12:43 pm, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

fruit & veggies wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them. When I decided to edit and transfer
my data and MP3 CD backup collection to DVD to save space, I found the
eMac iTunes better suited and more enjoyable for the MP3 task, but
without a DVD writer, I settled for iTunes on Windows. As for the
data CDs- Windows Commander, an alternative to Windows Explorer, was
markedly better at allowing me to view and shift large amounts of data
in preparation for burning CDs. I found no way to do this as quickly
and accurately on the Mac, although there may be a piece of software
I've not discovered that will handle this task admirably. Any
suggestions would be appreciated from anyone who has bothered to read
this far.
Recently, I added 512 MB of PC 2700 memory, around $45, for a total
of 1 GB and an AGP 8X card for about $80 to my Compaq AMD XP 3200+
machine, which is about a year old. This box has a fast HP DVD
writer, CD-ROM, 56K modem (yes, I'm still in dialup country,) lots of
USB slots, a 9-in-1 card reader and Ethernet. There is onboard video
and sound for those who don't need any more. It cost far less than a
comparable Mac would - comparable meaning a Mac with the processing
power of the AMD chip and slots for add-on cards - the only one
available being the PowerMac. With the recent upgrades, the
aforementioned Compaq machine is now not only as fast as an iMac, but
I've never had any problems playing MIDI files of any type on it
because it has slots and I have a high-quality Turtle Beach sound card
onboard. Most of my music software is on the PC and it operates well.
I have an older NEC 15" CRT display that is a disappointment compared
with all the Mac displays. But, for $200 or $300, if I choose to
spend it, I can get a 17" flat panel that will certainly improve the
viewing. It still won't be an Apple display - hard to beat them or
the Sony.
Speaking of Sony, there is a new Sony vaio system, for around $1600,
that is a 17" LCD display hiding a computer behind it. It looks
curiously like the iMac with the exception that it is black and a bit
deeper. Appears that the iMac is setting a trend for the all-in-one
LCD computer.
In conclusion, since I can't afford to buy another Mac, and since the
face of home computing is about to change in a big way over the next 2
or 3 years, I've decided to stay with both machines and work to their
strengths and see what the future holds. If you like the system you
have now and it works well enough for you to live with it, you may
want to consider waiting to see what the future brings - that is,
unless you have unlimited or sufficient capital to try every new toy
that comes out. Recently, I've seen a couple cheap $400 PC laptops
being sold as a house computer by various large electronics retailers
if you're looking for a laptop on a low budget.
How, you say, will home computing change? Speculating, Apple hardware
will drop in price when Intel gets inside. Future Apple machines may
allow you to run multiple operating systems - Mac OS X and Windows for
example. Steve Jobs may be about to make that Apple so appealing that
a lot of folks can't resist taking a bite. Longhorn will have to be
good to compete with future releases of OS X, so if Microsoft intends
to remain a player, you can count on them clearing up most of the
problems that have kept Windows from excelling - open doors for
viruses and spyware, system bugs, code that discriminates against
competitors (non-Microsoft alternative) software etc. Will Microsoft
turn the Xbox into a computer? Obviously, the smaller footprint is
happening. Mac Mini, Shuttle xPC, etc. Ultimately, maybe your HDTV
monitor will also serve as a computer with voice commands allowing you
to watch digital TV, surf the net or dictate a word processor doc from
your easy chair.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Send Discard











Discussion subject changed to "Observations from a simple man . . . -
pfheaven.mid (0/1)" by fruit &amp; veggies








12. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 6:47 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:47:26 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 6:47 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attached it to this post - a guaranteed MIDI file, not
a virus. I would post a link to it, but then someone would accuse me
of spamming the group with a link to a website. I've been able to
determine that what is probably causing the file to stop is that the
MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur . If one were
to strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance.

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems." When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC - they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.


Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.


This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their
expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just
looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger














13. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 6:50 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:50:08 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 6:50 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attached it to this post - a guaranteed MIDI file, not
a virus. I would post a link to it, but then someone would accuse me
of spamming the group with a link to a website. I've been able to
determine that what is probably causing the file to stop is that the
MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur . If one were
to strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance.

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems." When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC - they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.


Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.


This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their
expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just
looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger














14. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 7:03 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:03:21 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 7:03 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid


What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems." When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC - they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.


Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.


This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their
expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just
looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger














15. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 8:18 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:18:18 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 8:18 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems."

What can I tell you? It played fine. It doesn't stop and it plays
right
through until the end.



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC - they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.

Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others
who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. -
Rudyard Kiplinger

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."













16. Lloyd Parsons View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 9:20 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 9:20 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <alangbaker-FBF902.18181821062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems."

What can I tell you? It played fine. It doesn't stop and it plays right
through until the end.

Same here.













17. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 1:41 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:41:29 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 1:41 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500, Lloyd Parsons


<lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Same here.

Again, please respond with system specs. Thanks.













18. Lloyd Parsons View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 6:56 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 06:56:42 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 6:56 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <nt1ib1t2d931q7mhv3f2n86ok38hhik...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Same here.

Again, please respond with system specs. Thanks.

OSX V10.4.1, QT7, G5 Single Tower, 1GB RAM, built-in sound.

Used Safari and it played with QT7 just fine, basically load 'n go.
But
there was silence during a short period of it, I had assumed that was
just part of the file.














19. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 12:02 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:02:55 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 12:02 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <lloydparsons-79364C.06564222062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

In article <nt1ib1t2d931q7mhv3f2n86ok38hhik...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Same here.

Again, please respond with system specs. Thanks.

OSX V10.4.1, QT7, G5 Single Tower, 1GB RAM, built-in sound.

Used Safari and it played with QT7 just fine, basically load 'n go. But
there was silence during a short period of it, I had assumed that was
just part of the file.

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.













20. Lloyd Parsons View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 8:44 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:44:56 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 8:44 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-3292C0.00025523062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <lloydparsons-79364C.06564222062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <nt1ib1t2d931q7mhv3f2n86ok38hhik...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Same here.

Again, please respond with system specs. Thanks.

OSX V10.4.1, QT7, G5 Single Tower, 1GB RAM, built-in sound.

Used Safari and it played with QT7 just fine, basically load 'n go. But
there was silence during a short period of it, I had assumed that was
just part of the file.

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Thanks for the info. And the test file, it is interesting.

I've not run across that issue before, although my music stuff is
mostly
Garageband (and bad Garageband at that) created, with the loops and
keyboard soft instruments.


All of course created for my personal pleasure, certainly not for
publication! ;-)















Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service -
Privacy Policy
©2007 Google

Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)



Messages 21 - 30 of 60 - Collapse all
« Older Newer »
/groups/adfetch?adid=F8NcJRIAAABINsdO1dtYDwnCm-6KYyIcTQHWiC7y-Vq9SNxAy4S8Uw&hl=en

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


21. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 24 2005, 12:00 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:00:50 -0500
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 12:00 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <lloydparsons-A24AD9.08445623062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks for the info. And the test file, it is interesting.

I've not run across that issue before, although my music stuff is mostly
Garageband (and bad Garageband at that) created, with the loops and
keyboard soft instruments.

All of course created for my personal pleasure, certainly not for
publication! ;-)

As a listener, always glad to find something new and interesting to
listen to!













22. RichardK View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 1:16 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:16:50 +0100
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 1:16 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruitveg wrote:

In article <lloydparsons-79364C.06564222062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <nt1ib1t2d931q7mhv3f2n86ok38hhik...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:20:05 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydpars...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Same here.

Again, please respond with system specs. Thanks.

OSX V10.4.1, QT7, G5 Single Tower, 1GB RAM, built-in sound.

Used Safari and it played with QT7 just fine, basically load 'n go. But
there was silence during a short period of it, I had assumed that was
just part of the file.

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Which is why I was confused by it working fine on the 266MHz G3. Very
strange indeed. More to the point that G3 is running Panther 10.3.9
via
XPostFacto /and/ is running Quicktime 7.0.

Richard


--
RichardK - 1980s in a can. http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/music/
Retro computing - http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/retrotech/
Cars - 2004 Beetle Cabrio, 1989 Supra 3.0i, 1990 Sera, 1989 Volvo 740
MidiGuitar, AU/X. Apple 77-04. See links. Email - upgrade to 128 ;)














23. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 11:48 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 23:48:56 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 11:48 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <3i0ckiFjdo8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Which is why I was confused by it working fine on the 266MHz G3. Very
strange indeed. More to the point that G3 is running Panther 10.3.9 via
XPostFacto /and/ is running Quicktime 7.0.

Richard

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar
results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface
and
external MIDI playback module.













24. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 11:58 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 04:58:38 GMT
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 11:58 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-1337D0.23485623062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <3i0ckiFjdo8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Which is why I was confused by it working fine on the 266MHz G3. Very
strange indeed. More to the point that G3 is running Panther 10.3.9 via
XPostFacto /and/ is running Quicktime 7.0.

Richard

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface and
external MIDI playback module.

The fact that several people have played the file successfully on
equal
or lesser hardware suggests that you're wrong about that...

Sorry.


--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."














25. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 24 2005, 12:25 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:25:59 -0500
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 12:25 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <alangbaker-6BE469.21583823062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The fact that several people have played the file successfully on equal
or lesser hardware suggests that you're wrong about that...

Sorry.

Regardless, they just aren't working on my hardware setup and the fact
that there are mixed results from various hardware versions shows some
inconsistency in performance expectations, even on similar machines.
In
this case the Mac just doesn't work for me. My PC does for these
"difficult" MIDI files, so I'll have to stay with what works with what
I
have.













26. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 26 2005, 11:36 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:36:02 GMT
Local: Sun, Jun 26 2005 11:36 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-89614F.00255924062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,


fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <alangbaker-6BE469.21583823062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The fact that several people have played the file successfully on equal
or lesser hardware suggests that you're wrong about that...

Sorry.

Regardless, they just aren't working on my hardware setup and the fact
that there are mixed results from various hardware versions shows some
inconsistency in performance expectations, even on similar machines. In
this case the Mac just doesn't work for me. My PC does for these
"difficult" MIDI files, so I'll have to stay with what works with what I
have.

Not "the Mac", *your* Mac. And it appears you are far more interested
in
having it fail than in having it work.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."














27. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 24 2005, 10:04 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:04:12 -0600
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 10:04 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <alangbaker-6BE469.21583823062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

In article <ruta-1337D0.23485623062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,
fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <3i0ckiFjdo8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Which is why I was confused by it working fine on the 266MHz G3. Very
strange indeed. More to the point that G3 is running Panther 10.3.9 via
XPostFacto /and/ is running Quicktime 7.0.

Richard

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface and
external MIDI playback module.

The fact that several people have played the file successfully on equal
or lesser hardware suggests that you're wrong about that...

CC#64 is the culprit. CC#64 is a sustain controller and, as with most
hardware and software synths, (with very few exceptions... like the
Yamaha Disklavier, which is a real piano with real pedals and can use
continuously variable sustain) the data values should be (a value of
127) or off (a value of O). Apparently, either QT or the 'Quicktime
Music Synthesizer' cannot handle seeing values other than 0 or 127.
I've
seen this on Macs and PC's. I suspect it is not QT itself but certain
implementations of the 'Quicktime Music Synthesizer'... as it is not
happening for all listeners.

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve














28. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 24 2005, 10:26 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:26:55 -0600
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 10:26 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-1337D0.23485623062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <3i0ckiFjdo8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks. The silence is when the file overloads QT and bogs down or
stops. There are no pauses or silences in the file.

Which is why I was confused by it working fine on the 266MHz G3. Very
strange indeed. More to the point that G3 is running Panther 10.3.9 via
XPostFacto /and/ is running Quicktime 7.0.

Richard

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface and
external MIDI playback module.

How can you be so sure of this? What testing did you do to narrow it
down? I had problems on my dual 1 Ghz G4 until I resolved them by
tweaking a few CC#64 values. These values need to be set either on
(127)
or off (0). Read my post to Alan baker written this morning for more
info.

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve


29. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 26 2005, 12:02 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:02:45 -0500
Local: Sun, Jun 26 2005 12:02 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:26:55 -0600, Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface and
external MIDI playback module.

How can you be so sure of this? What testing did you do to narrow it
down? I had problems on my dual 1 Ghz G4 until I resolved them by
tweaking a few CC#64 values. These values need to be set either on (127)
or off (0). Read my post to Alan baker written this morning for more
info.

I experimented with reducing the high value (63 or 64) of the sustain
pedal controllers # 64 by reducing them to 32 and still had the same
problem. As you say, QT and other Mac MIDI software programs or the
Mac hardware must have trouble playing back anything that is not full
on (127) or full off (0). "On" values are not always registered as
127 and only on the Mac have I encountered problems with the playback.
As mentioned earlier, the file in question is a MIDI performance but
not a "live performance" recorded to a sequencer. So the values were
edited. Rather than edit a MIDI out of recognition to get it to
playback consistently on Macs with QT, I'd rather record it to an MP3
and get the assurance that it will playback as digital audio on QT.
Lots easier than changing hundreds of lines of controller values.













30. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 26 2005, 12:32 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 11:32:46 -0600
Local: Sun, Jun 26 2005 12:32 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <72dsb19ins21ivnkejoval8268g4s2r...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:26:55 -0600, Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I ran the file and several others from the site with QT and MIDI
grasshopper on OS X and MIGIgraphy in classic mode with similar results.
These files are just too much for the basic software/hardware combo of
the eMac without a higher-end MIDI software program, MIDI interface and
external MIDI playback module.

How can you be so sure of this? What testing did you do to narrow it
down? I had problems on my dual 1 Ghz G4 until I resolved them by
tweaking a few CC#64 values. These values need to be set either on (127)
or off (0). Read my post to Alan baker written this morning for more
info.

I experimented with reducing the high value (63 or 64) of the sustain
pedal controllers # 64 by reducing them to 32 and still had the same
problem. As you say, QT and other Mac MIDI software programs or the
Mac hardware must have trouble playing back anything that is not full
on (127) or full off (0).

Where did I "say" what you are attempting to attribute to me above?
Did
you 'experiment' with the file that you posted? Is there an original
file done by Jeff Fallen that you didn't 'experiment' on?

"On" values are not always registered as
127 and only on the Mac have I encountered problems with the playback.

You'll find that inexpensive softsynths don't respond with anything
other than an 'on' or 'off' condition, regardless of the values they
get
sent. In fact, relatively few real world pieces of hardware ever
responded... it wasn't even part of the MIDI spec, such controllers
were
predefined as on/off. If you were using those hardware pieces on a Mac
that did respond with continuously variable CC#64 data, it would not
be
an issue. If you were using some of the more expensive softsynths
(like
Giga3's newest version of the Gs3) that generate such data, this
wouldn't be an issue on a Mac. Changing the values to reflect the
on/off
character of the controller is simply not an issue. It this was a file
that was intended to be played back by GM, either the file got
corrupted, the creator failed to adhere to the spec... or someone
(like
you admitted above) "experimented" on the file. See the bottom of this
post.

As mentioned earlier, the file in question is a MIDI performance but
not a "live performance" recorded to a sequencer.

I'm a musician, I only consider a "live performance" a "performance".
I
certainly would not consider editing CC#64 data, after the fact, a
"performance" of any kind. The main point here is that this file was
definitely not played with a pedal, mod-wheel, etc. that sent
continuously variable data to CC#64.

So the values were
edited. Rather than edit a MIDI out of recognition to get it to
playback consistently on Macs with QT,

You're confused... there is no editing MIDI "out of recognition" going
on here. If I set the values to 0 when I see a value of 63 or less
(where Fallen didn't want the pedal)... and set them to 127 where I
see
a value of 64 and above (where Fallen did want the pedal), I'd get the
EXACT same playback as you (other than the voice that's used).

I'd rather record it to an MP3
and get the assurance that it will playback as digital audio on QT.
Lots easier than changing hundreds of lines of controller values.

Actually, there were only around 70 CC#64 values sprinkled throughout
this entire 4 track file... a decent sequencer would let you make the
changes relatively easily even if there were 'thousands' of such
events.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FYI, here is another MIDI file by Jeff Fallen that uses almost 3 times
as much CC#64 data as the Pennies From Heaven file uses. It has not
been
"experimented" on.


http://www.kunstderfuge.com/midi_you-make-abuse-linking-to-this-folde...
humann/impromptu_124_9_%28c%29fallen.mid


This plays just fine in QT... as a plug-in in Safari and in the stand
alone QT player. Notice that the values for CC#64 are either 0 or 127.
Being that many of the values in the Pennies From Heaven file were set
like this, I'd say either someone (you stated above that you did it)
tampered with the file and/or some form of corruption took place.


--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve



Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)



Messages 31 - 40 of 60 - Collapse all
« Older Newer »
/groups/adfetch?adid=uc2gfBIAAABfwEcNRr_-DLtxGrV3PYAVTQHWiC7y-Vq9SNxAy4S8Uw&hl=en

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


31. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 1:58 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:58:58 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 1:58 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 11:32:46 -0600, Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

You'll find that inexpensive softsynths don't respond with anything
other than an 'on' or 'off' condition, regardless of the values they get
sent. In fact, relatively few real world pieces of hardware ever
responded... it wasn't even part of the MIDI spec, such controllers were
predefined as on/off. If you were using those hardware pieces on a Mac
that did respond with continuously variable CC#64 data, it would not be
an issue. If you were using some of the more expensive softsynths (like
Giga3's newest version of the Gs3) that generate such data, this
wouldn't be an issue on a Mac. Changing the values to reflect the on/off
character of the controller is simply not an issue. It this was a file
that was intended to be played back by GM, either the file got
corrupted, the creator failed to adhere to the spec... or someone (like
you admitted above) "experimented" on the file.

The only experimenting I did was to change the pedal values to try to
get it to playback on my Mac with QT, which was overloading because of
them. When I stripped them out, as I said earlier, it played back but
without the character of the original. No one should have to alter a
MIDI to get it to playback on a Mac. Apple should provide hardware
and software with every machine that will consistently playback a
relatively simple MIDI file. They do not - as you say above, you have
to spend more money and add-on something to get it to work. So if you
wish to obfuscate the issue with loads of technical data in an attempt
to show the superiority of the Mac or your advanced technical
knowledge, please have at it.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions,
others who wish to share their expertise,
still others who hope to overwhelm you with their knowledge
and some just looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger














32. RichardK View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 3:41 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:41:06 +0100
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 3:41 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

fruit & veggies wrote:

The only experimenting I did was to change the pedal values to try to
get it to playback on my Mac with QT, which was overloading because of
them. When I stripped them out, as I said earlier, it played back but
without the character of the original.

Well, duh.

It's not a VARIABLE controller. The key is not to strip them out, but
to
assign a value of 127 or 0.


That's the MIDI creator's problem, not the Mac's.


Try reading the helpful information you're given in future. You'd come
across rather less like someone who just wants to bash the Mac.


Richard


--
RichardK - 1980s in a can. http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/music/
Retro computing - http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/retrotech/
Cars - 2004 Beetle Cabrio, 1989 Supra 3.0i, 1990 Sera, 1989 Volvo 740
MidiGuitar, AU/X. Apple 77-04. See links. Email - upgrade to 128 ;)














33. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 9:16 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 08:16:11 -0600
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 9:16 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <3icgp6Fkvad...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

fruit & veggies wrote:

The only experimenting I did was to change the pedal values to try to
get it to playback on my Mac with QT, which was overloading because of
them. When I stripped them out, as I said earlier, it played back but
without the character of the original.

Well, duh.

It's not a VARIABLE controller. The key is not to strip them out, but to
assign a value of 127 or 0.

That's the MIDI creator's problem, not the Mac's.

Try reading the helpful information you're given in future. You'd come
across rather less like someone who just wants to bash the Mac.

Richard

Richard, he has a point here. The question for the buyer is: Would
this
prevent me from buying a Mac? For me, the answer is no.

How many Midi files are there that are meant to be played back on GM
soft synths that have variable programmed CC data? As it's not part of
the spec, there shouldn't be any unless corruption or tampering
occurred. I'd like to see the original file before he tampered with
it.
I hope he'll produce it.


--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve














34. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 9:11 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 08:11:57 -0600
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 9:11 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ans1c1pkan1r8erfllelrj7h4ufvarm...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 11:32:46 -0600, Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

You'll find that inexpensive softsynths don't respond with anything
other than an 'on' or 'off' condition, regardless of the values they get
sent. In fact, relatively few real world pieces of hardware ever
responded... it wasn't even part of the MIDI spec, such controllers were
predefined as on/off. If you were using those hardware pieces on a Mac
that did respond with continuously variable CC#64 data, it would not be
an issue. If you were using some of the more expensive softsynths (like
Giga3's newest version of the Gs3) that generate such data, this
wouldn't be an issue on a Mac. Changing the values to reflect the on/off
character of the controller is simply not an issue. It this was a file
that was intended to be played back by GM, either the file got
corrupted, the creator failed to adhere to the spec... or someone (like
you admitted above) "experimented" on the file.

The only experimenting I did was to change the pedal values to try to
get it to playback on my Mac with QT, which was overloading because of
them. When I stripped them out, as I said earlier, it played back but
without the character of the original. No one should have to alter a
MIDI to get it to playback on a Mac.

In certain instances, you'd have to alter a file to get it to playback
on a PC, too, especially if it got corrupted, which this file may have
gotten. You never did answer if this was the original file or not.
Other
files by Fallen had the proper values. One of the values in the file
you
sent was 57. Did you put that there?

Apple should provide hardware
and software with every machine that will consistently playback a
relatively simple MIDI file.

I agree... but as I said, I'll take the shortcomings of the Quicktime
Music Synthesizer as I get Core Midi and Core Audio, things I cannot
get
on a PC. I can always replace the soft synth engine on the Mac quite
easily. If your argument is buy a PC because it will playback CC#64
data
properly even if it's been variably programmed, you may have an
argument... depending upon what soft synth engine the PC is using. For
the reasons I just stated, I won't buy your argument... but someone
might. It just wouldn't be a deal breaker for me...

They do not - as you say above, you have
to spend more money and add-on something to get it to work. So if you
wish to obfuscate the issue with loads of technical data in an attempt
to show the superiority of the Mac or your advanced technical
knowledge, please have at it.

I'm not obfuscating anything, I'm merely pointing out the problems
with
Midi that can occur on *any* platform.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions,
others who wish to share their expertise,
still others who hope to overwhelm you with their knowledge
and some just looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit

Steve














35. Buzz View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 10:02 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Buzz <b...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:02:30 -0400
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 10:02 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

fruit & veggies wrote:

The only experimenting I did was to change the pedal values to try to
get it to playback on my Mac with QT, which was overloading because of
them. When I stripped them out, as I said earlier, it played back but
without the character of the original.

You thought that the original had character? It was overplayed, the
pedal made it sound muddy, and it lacks any nuance. I would rather
hear
nails on a blackboard than hear that file play on a
low-end sound module.

No one should have to alter a MIDI to get it to playback on a Mac.

No one should have to alter a *properly specified* MIDI to get it to
playback on a Mac. Of course, I did get it to play on a Macintosh.
The
Macintosh had no problem with this file, QT did.

Apple should provide hardware
and software with every machine that will consistently playback a
relatively simple MIDI file.

They do. That QT had a problem with this file tells you something
about
this file. It doesn't tell you anything about the Macintosh.

They do not - as you say above, you have

to spend more money and add-on something to get it to work.

I did add software, but I did not spend any money. Software sound
modules are plentiful, many are more powerful than QT. QT is included
as
a default for simple files. If you need more, and apparently you do,
get
something else. BFD

So if you

wish to obfuscate the issue with loads of technical data in an attempt
to show the superiority of the Mac or your advanced technical
knowledge, please have at it.

I thought that Steve was rather patient and that he spent a lot of
time
on this issue. He tried to explain why the file didn't work. On the
other hand, you seem rather like a jerk.













36. Snit View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 10:13 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Snit <S...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 08:13:24 -0700
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 10:13 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
"fruit & veggies" <r...@xxxxxxxx> stated in post
ans1c1pkan1r8erfllelrj7h4ufvarm...@xxxxxxx on 6/27/05 11:58 PM:

So if you wish to obfuscate the issue with loads of technical data in an
attempt to show the superiority of the Mac or your advanced technical
knowledge, please have at it.

LOL! I am not at all shocked that Steve Carroll has been caught
trying to
obfuscate yet again... that is one of his favorite trolling games.
Just
wait until he tries his hand at "logic"... what a joke his form of
"logic"
is... :)

--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying
NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs














37. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 28 2005, 10:26 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:26:04 -0600
Local: Tues, Jun 28 2005 10:26 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <BEE6B724.2071A%S...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


Snit <S...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"fruit & veggies" <r...@xxxxxxxx> stated in post
ans1c1pkan1r8erfllelrj7h4ufvarm...@xxxxxxx on 6/27/05 11:58 PM:

So if you wish to obfuscate the issue with loads of technical data in an
attempt to show the superiority of the Mac or your advanced technical
knowledge, please have at it.

LOL! I am not at all shocked that Steve Carroll has been caught trying to
obfuscate yet again... that is one of his favorite trolling games. Just
wait until he tries his hand at "logic"... what a joke his form of "logic"
is... :)

Snit, you have no idea what you are talking about here... or there...
or
anywhere:)

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve














38. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 1:39 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:39:31 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 1:39 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:18:18 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What can I tell you? It played fine. It doesn't stop and it plays right
through until the end.

Since you first requested the file be made available, I'd appreciate
the specs on your system that played the file successfully. I've
tried it on my eMac G4 with 1 gig memory and the QuickTime software
synthesizer - no go. Tried it in a Mac reseller store on an iMac with
the same QTsoft synth - no go. G5 PowerMac with a soundcard and/or
external MIDI playback device could handle it. PC with a soundcard
played it successfully on WMP, van Basco and QuickTime - not with the
soft synth but through the general MIDI soundcard selected in
QuickTime preferences Music.













39. Alan Baker View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 2:04 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:31 GMT
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 2:04 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <sd1ib1hgi94vs2rt986ua9sn2mmdvn5...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:18:18 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What can I tell you? It played fine. It doesn't stop and it plays right
through until the end.

Since you first requested the file be made available, I'd appreciate
the specs on your system that played the file successfully. I've

I've got a PowerBook G4 867MHz/768MB

tried it on my eMac G4 with 1 gig memory and the QuickTime software
synthesizer - no go. Tried it in a Mac reseller store on an iMac with
the same QTsoft synth - no go. G5 PowerMac with a soundcard and/or
external MIDI playback device could handle it. PC with a soundcard
played it successfully on WMP, van Basco and QuickTime - not with the
soft synth but through the general MIDI soundcard selected in
QuickTime preferences Music.

What was this "QTsoft synth" to which you refer? Were you just playing
it with Quicktime Player, or were you using another app?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."














40. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 2:24 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 02:24:43 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 2:24 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:31 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What was this "QTsoft synth" to which you refer? Were you just playing
it with Quicktime Player, or were you using another app?

I downloaded all the .pdf developer tech files with system specs at
Apple on all the Macs so that I could figure out how they work.
The QuickTime player uses a software synthesizer called the QuickTime
Music Synthesizer. This software provides the code for getting
different note values, sounds, sustain, release, etc. out of the
hardware. The main processor, the I/O controller and the audio codec
chips are the hardware involved. QuickTime takes a MIDI file and
converts it into a .mov file then plays it through the hardware. In
the process, it alters the sound. I've noticed that it adds a bit of
reverb and sustain that blurs MIDI files that already have those
parameters coded in as controller events. Many, maybe even most, MIDI
files playback using the QuickTime synthesizer but some don't. As I
said in another post, I was able to get QuickTime on a PC to play the
file but I had to switch the preferences from the QT Music Synthesizer
to General MIDI, which played the file through my soundcard.

On Jun 22 2005, 2:24 am, fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:31 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What was this "QTsoft synth" to which you refer? Were you just playing
it with Quicktime Player, or were you using another app?

I downloaded all the .pdf developer tech files with system specs at
Apple on all the Macs so that I could figure out how they work.
The QuickTime player uses a software synthesizer called the QuickTime
Music Synthesizer. This software provides the code for getting
different note values, sounds, sustain, release, etc. out of the
hardware. The main processor, the I/O controller and the audio codec
chips are the hardware involved. QuickTime takes a MIDI file and
converts it into a .mov file then plays it through the hardware. In
the process, it alters the sound. I've noticed that it adds a bit of
reverb and sustain that blurs MIDI files that already have those
parameters coded in as controller events. Many, maybe even most, MIDI
files playback using the QuickTime synthesizer but some don't. As I
said in another post, I was able to get QuickTime on a PC to play the
file but I had to switch the preferences from the QT Music Synthesizer
to General MIDI, which played the file through my soundcard.

Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)



Messages 41 - 50 of 60 - Collapse all
« Older Newer »
/groups/adfetch?adid=v56wtRIAAABxQ407zVqb674lvifMQtC9Hwpj-1wsmIAAqmmFyi89TA&hl=en

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


41. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 11:44 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:44:40 -0600
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 11:44 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <7m3ib1to9fmug8rnepov0vcoh8vtm2p...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:31 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What was this "QTsoft synth" to which you refer? Were you just playing
it with Quicktime Player, or were you using another app?

I downloaded all the .pdf developer tech files with system specs at
Apple on all the Macs so that I could figure out how they work.
The QuickTime player uses a software synthesizer called the QuickTime
Music Synthesizer. This software provides the code for getting
different note values, sounds, sustain, release, etc. out of the
hardware.

NO. As for any software (or hardware) synth, these values are obtained
from the MIDI file. The values are then *passed* to the sound modules
(hard or soft).

The main processor, the I/O controller and the audio codec
chips are the hardware involved. QuickTime takes a MIDI file and
converts it into a .mov file then plays it through the hardware. In
the process, it alters the sound.

The developer docs told you this 'altering' occurs? Can you show me
what
doc(s) stated this? As a MIDI file has no 'sound' of its own, how can
the sound be 'altered' ?

I've noticed that it adds a bit of
reverb and sustain that blurs MIDI files that already have those
parameters coded in as controller events.

Nothing is being added to the file... all that is happening is there's
a
different voice being used to playback the performance information
(most
likely quite different from the soft-synth that the file was
originally
created on). You're essentially suggesting that 'altered' voices
"blur"
the stream and that's not inaccurate because they occur after the
fact.
This file had an excessive, redundant use of controller data. It
simply
wasn't necessary to have that much controller data to produce the
sound
that was being sought by the creator... as a result, some soft-synths
will choke on it.

Many, maybe even most, MIDI
files playback using the QuickTime synthesizer but some don't. As I
said in another post, I was able to get QuickTime on a PC to play the
file but I had to switch the preferences from the QT Music Synthesizer
to General MIDI, which played the file through my soundcard.

I've noticed the same thing and this leads me to believe that the
implementation of the soft-synth that Apple uses is the culprit here.
IIRC this is a remake of an old Roland soft-synth. In any event, it
has
nothing to do with Quicktime other than that is the soft-synth it
currently ships with. As I stated in a previous post, I used QT in DP
and the file played fine.

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve


42. RichardK View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 3:35 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:35:22 +0100
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 3:35 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

fruit & veggies wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:18:18 GMT, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

What can I tell you? It played fine. It doesn't stop and it plays right
through until the end.

Since you first requested the file be made available, I'd appreciate
the specs on your system that played the file successfully. I've
tried it on my eMac G4 with 1 gig memory and the QuickTime software
synthesizer - no go. Tried it in a Mac reseller store on an iMac with
the same QTsoft synth - no go. G5 PowerMac with a soundcard and/or
external MIDI playback device could handle it.

Well, my G4 PowerBook played it but there was a point of silence I
suspect was due to my net connection. What happened was it played the
intro, then silence, but dragging the playback bar back to where it
had
gone quiet, it played all the way through.

My machine hasn't got anything additional installed.


Have you tried turning the volume up on the eMac?


(What's complex about it, btw? It's just some wanky jazz/classical
piano).


I'd wager if I send the file to my eMac upstairs (USB 2.0 1.25GHz,
10.3.9, QuickTime Pro 7.0.1) it will play, however, just to RAM the
point home to you, I'm going to try it on my Beige G3 running Panther
via XPostFacto - a 266MHz system.


Okay - here's a funny thing. Saved the file, and it doesn't play -
QuickTime doesn't recognize it when it's saved. Go to the link and it
plays (it even plays on the G3, no problems).


Richard


--
RichardK - 1980s in a can. http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/music/
Retro computing - http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/retrotech/
Cars - 2004 Beetle Cabrio, 1989 Supra 3.0i, 1990 Sera, 1989 Volvo 740
MidiGuitar, AU/X. Apple 77-04. See links. Email - upgrade to 128 ;)














43. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 12:00 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:00:32 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 12:00 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <3hsm6gFid9s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,


RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Well, my G4 PowerBook played it but there was a point of silence I
suspect was due to my net connection. What happened was it played the
intro, then silence, but dragging the playback bar back to where it had
gone quiet, it played all the way through.

The silence is where the file bogs down and stops. MIDIs don't
stream,
they download first from the source and then QuickTime converts them
to
..mov files and plays them. The playback bar drag works because after
the file stops it resets itself and you can restart it and will play
until it bogs down again, if it does.

My machine hasn't got anything additional installed.

Have you tried turning the volume up on the eMac?

Volume is not the problem.

(What's complex about it, btw? It's just some wanky jazz/classical piano).

The complex part of the file is the damper/sustain pedal controls that
cause the notes to hang over and pile up. They don't appear to clear
out on the QuickTime soft synth (and other software synthesizers) like
they do on a hardware (soundcard) playback. QuickTime soft synth adds
some reverb and sustain of its own that adds to the problem.

I'd wager if I send the file to my eMac upstairs (USB 2.0 1.25GHz,
10.3.9, QuickTime Pro 7.0.1) it will play, however, just to RAM the
point home to you, I'm going to try it on my Beige G3 running Panther
via XPostFacto - a 266MHz system.

Okay - here's a funny thing. Saved the file, and it doesn't play -
QuickTime doesn't recognize it when it's saved. Go to the link and it
plays (it even plays on the G3, no problems).

Richard

had the same problem with another MIDI - when I saved it, the file
wasn't recognized by QT. BTW, I'm running 10.3.9, QT 7.0.1 on my 1.25
GHz eMac with 1 gig memory. This is surely not a hardware problem.
Thanks for all your input.













Discussion subject changed to "Observations from a simple man . . ."
by fruitveg








44. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 12:19 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:19:14 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 12:19 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-B2E32A.00003223062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,


fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


Just as a coda - I took the file, stripped out all the pedal
controllers
and uploaded it as:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheavn1.mid


And it plays fine all the way through, but has lost some of the nuance
that it had with pedaling controls. The QT soft synth adds a little
reverb and sustain.














Discussion subject changed to "Observations from a simple man . . . -
pfheaven.mid (0/1)" by Buzz








45. Buzz View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 10:59 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Buzz <b...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:59:22 -0400
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 10:59 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

fruitveg wrote:

(What's complex about it, btw? It's just some wanky jazz/classical piano).

The complex part of the file is the damper/sustain pedal controls that
cause the notes to hang over and pile up. They don't appear to clear
out on the QuickTime soft synth (and other software synthesizers) like
they do on a hardware (soundcard) playback. QuickTime soft synth adds
some reverb and sustain of its own that adds to the problem.

I played it without any problems on several other software
synthesizers,
both free and commercial. The problem is in QuickTime.

I still do not see what this has to do with the Macintosh. QuickTime
is
an application. QuickTime doesn't meet your needs. Get another
application. How hard is that?



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I'd wager if I send the file to my eMac upstairs (USB 2.0 1.25GHz,
10.3.9, QuickTime Pro 7.0.1) it will play, however, just to RAM the
point home to you, I'm going to try it on my Beige G3 running Panther
via XPostFacto - a 266MHz system.

Okay - here's a funny thing. Saved the file, and it doesn't play -
QuickTime doesn't recognize it when it's saved. Go to the link and it
plays (it even plays on the G3, no problems).

Richard

had the same problem with another MIDI - when I saved it, the file
wasn't recognized by QT. BTW, I'm running 10.3.9, QT 7.0.1 on my 1.25
GHz eMac with 1 gig memory. This is surely not a hardware problem.
Thanks for all your input.

46. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 8:24 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:24:22 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 8:24 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
My apologies to the group for these multiple postings - I originally
tried to post twice with a binary file attached and got a message that
the filter had rejected the post - the attachmentments were rejected
but the messages were posted.













47. Wally View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 9:02 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Wally <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 02:02:13 GMT
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 9:02 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 22/6/05 8:03 AM, in article
ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx,
"fruit & veggies" <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:




- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

3min-8sec file played flawlessly on my G4 400 using QT 7.0.1.

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems."

Given my experience with that file....I would expect that too!

When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC

It does become tiresome reading about so called problems that nobody
appears
to be able to duplicate....it happens a lot here....usually to the
same
people! Perhaps rightly or wrongly you were considered just another
one of
those?

<snip>














48. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 1:45 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:45:27 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 1:45 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 02:02:13 GMT, Wally <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

3min-8sec file played flawlessly on my G4 400 using QT 7.0.1.

Using the QT soft synth or other MIDI playback hardware or software?













49. Tim Adams View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 7:05 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 12:05:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <BEE03916.154E5%wa...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Wally <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 22/6/05 8:03 AM, in article ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx,
"fruit & veggies" <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

3min-8sec file played flawlessly on my G4 400 using QT 7.0.1.

ditto for me. G4 12" Powerbook 1.25Ghz using QT 7.0.1



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems."

Given my experience with that file....I would expect that too!

When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC

It does become tiresome reading about so called problems that nobody appears
to be able to duplicate....it happens a lot here....usually to the same
people! Perhaps rightly or wrongly you were considered just another one of
those?

<snip>

--
reguarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

Tim














50. Nasht0n View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 5:37 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:37:55 GMT
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 5:37 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Wally wrote:

On 22/6/05 8:03 AM, in article ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx,
"fruit & veggies" <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

3min-8sec file played flawlessly on my G4 400 using QT 7.0.1.

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems."

Given my experience with that file....I would expect that too!

When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC

It does become tiresome reading about so called problems that nobody appears
to be able to duplicate....it happens a lot here....usually to the same
people! Perhaps rightly or wrongly you were considered just another one of
those?

<snip>

It does become tiresome reading about so called problems that the
Macnuts are unable to duplicate....it happens a lot here....usually to
the same people!

Fruits and vegs, trash the prefs file for quicktime. On a Mac, doing
this solves many problems as far as not being able to run apps.


Nicolas



Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)



Messages 51 - 60 of 60 - Collapse all
« Older Newer »
/groups/adfetch?adid=ZD_WQxIAAABdqpWmipXzd69luYf8oKdFTQHWiC7y-Vq9SNxAy4S8Uw&hl=en

The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful


51. C Lund View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 3:00 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: C Lund <c...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:00:07 +0200
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 3:00 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

It played just fine for the first minute or so, and then it went
quiet. If I stopped and started it, the music would return. Odd.

BTW: I played this via Safari, on 10.3.9 and QT 7.0.1.


--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund














52. RichardK View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 3:37 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: RichardK <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:37:33 +0100
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 3:37 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . . - pfheaven.mid (0/1)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
C Lund wrote:

In article <ut9hb1t0fekitqblahj2n4ml32qt770...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

It played just fine for the first minute or so, and then it went
quiet. If I stopped and started it, the music would return. Odd.

BTW: I played this via Safari, on 10.3.9 and QT 7.0.1.

Did that to me, too, but not on the 266MHz G3 - that played it
perfectly
from the connection.

Richard


--
RichardK - 1980s in a can. http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/music/
Retro computing - http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/retrotech/
Cars - 2004 Beetle Cabrio, 1989 Supra 3.0i, 1990 Sera, 1989 Volvo 740
MidiGuitar, AU/X. Apple 77-04. See links. Email - upgrade to 128 ;)














Discussion subject changed to "Observations from a simple man . . ."
by fruit &amp; veggies








53. fruit & veggies View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 7:03 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:03:55 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 7:03 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid


What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems." When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC - they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.


Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.


This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and
thoughful advice and opinions, others who wish to share their
expertise, still others who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just
looking for an argument. - Rudyard Kiplinger


54. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 10:43 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:43:09 -0600
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 10:43 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <umahb1pnl215ubq096f5dqgpnmanvb5...@xxxxxxx>,
fruit & veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:43:49 GMT, John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

Not at all - just offering my experiences. Many Mac users are so
hyper-sensitive that any criticism of their platform is immediately
rejected, even if true, and the poster is labelled as a troll. I have
an eMac and a PC and these are facts, not trumped up propaganda for
one system over another. As for the MIDI file that bogs down on
QuickTime, I've attempted to attach it to this post - a guaranteed
MIDI file, not a virus. But the news service is filtering and
rejecting it, I suppose because it is a binary file. I would post it
to alt.binaries.sounds.midi but the file might not make the upload or
be altered, so I'll post a link to it for the express purpose of
providing an example of what I'm talking about. This is not spam to
attract traffic to a website and the newsserver log will show that.
I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller

Yes, MIDI controller #64 (hold or sustain pedal) is the culprit here.

events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance.

The "performance"? Did you actually 'look' at the data in this MIDI
file? This file was 'performed' in a sequencer and edited :-)

Realistically, you'd only need to thin it to the point where no one
would be able to tell the difference between the thinned and
non-thinned
version. This is commonly done when working with this type of data so
as
not to overload the MIDI stream with redundant info... regardless of
the
playback devices. The reason? MIDI itself has only so much bandwidth.
I
took this file and played it back in Digital Performer using Apple's
software instruments (which uses QT) using OSX 10.3.9 and the version
of
QT that version of the OS uses... done on a Mac with no audio card and
the file played back fine. It did not play back continuously when I
run
it from the QT app by itself (QT Music Synthesizer). I've seen this
same
thing happen on PC soft-synths, too.

If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy. The link to the MIDI is here:

http://www.geocities.com/lampbay/pfheaven.mid

What I expect to happen is that a chorus of Mac users will rush to
expound that "it played fine on my Mac with no problems." When I
addressed this question at the Mac Music website, I posted a link to
the file and responses to my post ended immediately. I assume because
of embarassment that QuickTime is just about as good as most low-end
software synthesizers for the Mac or PC

You're certainly entitled to your opinion... I believe QT is as good
or
better than many low-end soft-synths... and that's really all it needs
to be for its target audience. That the portion of QT that handles
MIDI
data does so like it does, along with the rest of QT's capabilities,
is
a pretty mean feat of engineering IMO.

- they will overload when
encountering a MIDI file with more note and controller events than
they can handle.

**ANY* MIDI based audio system will overload when fed more MIDI data
than it can handle, in fact, that's why such as thing as dynamic voice
allocation in the MIDI spec exists.

Ultimately, the current reality that must be faced is that someone who
understands PC hardware and how to put it together, can go to an
electronics store sale, buy an AMD 64-bit processor on a fast buss
speed motherboard with basic onboard audio and video, a power supply,
a couple of sticks of 512 MB PC3200 memory, a mini-tower or similar
case, an internal dual format DVD+-/CD writer, an AGP 8x video card
and a modem - a basic system - for as low as $500-$600. This system
will outperform, speedwise, any Mac with the possible exception of the
dual G5 PowerMac. The big disadvantage is that is will not run OS X
and Mac software, which as I said in a previous post, is preferable to
many who have used it.

Depending upon the onboard audio, this is possibly true... but as I
see
it, this isn't really much of an advantage because QT works for the
vast
majority of MIDI files out there and anyone that wants any kind of
decent MIDI performance won't be using the stock MIDI implementation
that comes with Macs or PCs. For my part, I'll gladly trade having
what
some might consider a less robust, built in, MIDI soft-synth for the
advantages that Core Audio brings to the table. You can't pay any
price
on a Windows box and get that. Of course, like anyone that's remotely
interested in MIDI, I don't stick with the stock soft-synths.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others
who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. -
Rudyard Kiplinger

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit

Steve


55. fruitveg View profile
More options Jun 23 2005, 11:59 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 23:59:14 -0500
Local: Thurs, Jun 23 2005 11:59 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <noone-054ADF.09430923062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

**ANY* MIDI based audio system will overload when fed more MIDI data
than it can handle, in fact, that's why such as thing as dynamic voice
allocation in the MIDI spec exists.

QT works for the vast majority of MIDI files out there and anyone that wants any kind of
decent MIDI performance won't be using the stock MIDI implementation
that comes with Macs or PCs.

Interestingly enough, QT wouldn't have any trouble if the file was an
MP3 converted from the MIDI and something to think about with so many
different software/hardware possibilities that might/might not handle
the MIDI commands but would have no trouble with the MP3 digital
audio.
Thanks for the clarity and knowledgeable summation of the issue.


56. Steve Carroll View profile
More options Jun 24 2005, 10:19 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:19:49 -0600
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 10:19 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <ruta-E2B137.23591423062...@xxxxxxxxxx>,



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruitveg <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <noone-054ADF.09430923062...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve Carroll <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

**ANY* MIDI based audio system will overload when fed more MIDI data
than it can handle, in fact, that's why such as thing as dynamic voice
allocation in the MIDI spec exists.

QT works for the vast majority of MIDI files out there and anyone that
wants any kind of
decent MIDI performance won't be using the stock MIDI implementation
that comes with Macs or PCs.

Interestingly enough, QT wouldn't have any trouble if the file was an
MP3 converted from the MIDI and something to think about with so many
different software/hardware possibilities that might/might not handle
the MIDI commands but would have no trouble with the MP3 digital audio.
Thanks for the clarity and knowledgeable summation of the issue.

This makes perfect sense as the problem lies with controller data 64
and, I believe, the 'Quicktime Music Synthesizer'... this type of data
doesn't exist in an MP3 file. Please read my recent post to Alan
Baker.

--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim."
- Snit


Steve

57. Jim Polaski View profile
More options Jun 21 2005, 8:48 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Jim Polaski <jpola...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:48:49 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 21 2005 8:48 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <plYte.31409$J12.8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

fruit & veggies wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them. When I decided to edit and transfer
my data and MP3 CD backup collection to DVD to save space, I found the
eMac iTunes better suited and more enjoyable for the MP3 task, but
without a DVD writer, I settled for iTunes on Windows. As for the
data CDs- Windows Commander, an alternative to Windows Explorer, was
markedly better at allowing me to view and shift large amounts of data
in preparation for burning CDs. I found no way to do this as quickly
and accurately on the Mac, although there may be a piece of software
I've not discovered that will handle this task admirably. Any
suggestions would be appreciated from anyone who has bothered to read
this far.
Recently, I added 512 MB of PC 2700 memory, around $45, for a total
of 1 GB and an AGP 8X card for about $80 to my Compaq AMD XP 3200+
machine, which is about a year old. This box has a fast HP DVD
writer, CD-ROM, 56K modem (yes, I'm still in dialup country,) lots of
USB slots, a 9-in-1 card reader and Ethernet. There is onboard video
and sound for those who don't need any more. It cost far less than a
comparable Mac would - comparable meaning a Mac with the processing
power of the AMD chip and slots for add-on cards - the only one
available being the PowerMac. With the recent upgrades, the
aforementioned Compaq machine is now not only as fast as an iMac, but
I've never had any problems playing MIDI files of any type on it
because it has slots and I have a high-quality Turtle Beach sound card
onboard. Most of my music software is on the PC and it operates well.
I have an older NEC 15" CRT display that is a disappointment compared
with all the Mac displays. But, for $200 or $300, if I choose to
spend it, I can get a 17" flat panel that will certainly improve the
viewing. It still won't be an Apple display - hard to beat them or
the Sony.
Speaking of Sony, there is a new Sony vaio system, for around $1600,
that is a 17" LCD display hiding a computer behind it. It looks
curiously like the iMac with the exception that it is black and a bit
deeper. Appears that the iMac is setting a trend for the all-in-one
LCD computer.
In conclusion, since I can't afford to buy another Mac, and since the
face of home computing is about to change in a big way over the next 2
or 3 years, I've decided to stay with both machines and work to their
strengths and see what the future holds. If you like the system you
have now and it works well enough for you to live with it, you may
want to consider waiting to see what the future brings - that is,
unless you have unlimited or sufficient capital to try every new toy
that comes out. Recently, I've seen a couple cheap $400 PC laptops
being sold as a house computer by various large electronics retailers
if you're looking for a laptop on a low budget.
How, you say, will home computing change? Speculating, Apple hardware
will drop in price when Intel gets inside. Future Apple machines may
allow you to run multiple operating systems - Mac OS X and Windows for
example. Steve Jobs may be about to make that Apple so appealing that
a lot of folks can't resist taking a bite. Longhorn will have to be
good to compete with future releases of OS X, so if Microsoft intends
to remain a player, you can count on them clearing up most of the
problems that have kept Windows from excelling - open doors for
viruses and spyware, system bugs, code that discriminates against
competitors (non-Microsoft alternative) software etc. Will Microsoft
turn the Xbox into a computer? Obviously, the smaller footprint is
happening. Mac Mini, Shuttle xPC, etc. Ultimately, maybe your HDTV
monitor will also serve as a computer with voice commands allowing you
to watch digital TV, surf the net or dictate a word processor doc from
your easy chair.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others
who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. -
Rudyard Kiplinger

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

I'd bet you think you aren't a troll either.

--
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
expecting that he will get nothing in return!"

58. Nasht0n View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 5:39 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:39:02 GMT
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 5:39 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Jim Polaski wrote:

In article <plYte.31409$J12.8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

fruit & veggies wrote:

My G4 eMac with 1 GB of memory is a "good" machine - the CRT is a
quality display. No doubt that OS X is a consistent, comfortable and
user friendly OS, vastly superior to Windows in some ways. I find
that programs install more easily and run more predictably most of the
time on a Mac. I like the look and feel of working and playing with a
Mac - the fonts and graphics are more pleasing, surfing the web is a
more enjoyable experience.
My Compaq PC has a more business-like look and feel and Windows XP, as
all the previous versions, can surprise you sometimes with unexpected
problems or bog downs when you overload it. Another problem with XP
is that you must have the absolute latest version of application, game
or other software or you may have compatibility problems. Recently I
installed Word Perfect 12 Home Office. There is an extra program
included (Pinnacle Instant CD/DVD) as part of the package that crashed
my system when I first tried to use it. The Microsoft system compiled
an error report - when sent, I was advised that I needed to click on a
link for a Pinnacle fix - the upgrade of 25.8 MBs. After 2-3 hours of
dialup downloading, the fix was installed and worked. I've never seen
or heard of this kind of problem on a Mac. But, the eMac G4 is a
comparatively slow machine; I bought the combo drive to save money.
Later, I found out, that if I wanted to use iDVD, I needed to have an
eMac with the SuperDrive installed or, maybe, with the right Pioneer
external drive, it would work. The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them. When I decided to edit and transfer
my data and MP3 CD backup collection to DVD to save space, I found the
eMac iTunes better suited and more enjoyable for the MP3 task, but
without a DVD writer, I settled for iTunes on Windows. As for the
data CDs- Windows Commander, an alternative to Windows Explorer, was
markedly better at allowing me to view and shift large amounts of data
in preparation for burning CDs. I found no way to do this as quickly
and accurately on the Mac, although there may be a piece of software
I've not discovered that will handle this task admirably. Any
suggestions would be appreciated from anyone who has bothered to read
this far.
Recently, I added 512 MB of PC 2700 memory, around $45, for a total
of 1 GB and an AGP 8X card for about $80 to my Compaq AMD XP 3200+
machine, which is about a year old. This box has a fast HP DVD
writer, CD-ROM, 56K modem (yes, I'm still in dialup country,) lots of
USB slots, a 9-in-1 card reader and Ethernet. There is onboard video
and sound for those who don't need any more. It cost far less than a
comparable Mac would - comparable meaning a Mac with the processing
power of the AMD chip and slots for add-on cards - the only one
available being the PowerMac. With the recent upgrades, the
aforementioned Compaq machine is now not only as fast as an iMac, but
I've never had any problems playing MIDI files of any type on it
because it has slots and I have a high-quality Turtle Beach sound card
onboard. Most of my music software is on the PC and it operates well.
I have an older NEC 15" CRT display that is a disappointment compared
with all the Mac displays. But, for $200 or $300, if I choose to
spend it, I can get a 17" flat panel that will certainly improve the
viewing. It still won't be an Apple display - hard to beat them or
the Sony.
Speaking of Sony, there is a new Sony vaio system, for around $1600,
that is a 17" LCD display hiding a computer behind it. It looks
curiously like the iMac with the exception that it is black and a bit
deeper. Appears that the iMac is setting a trend for the all-in-one
LCD computer.
In conclusion, since I can't afford to buy another Mac, and since the
face of home computing is about to change in a big way over the next 2
or 3 years, I've decided to stay with both machines and work to their
strengths and see what the future holds. If you like the system you
have now and it works well enough for you to live with it, you may
want to consider waiting to see what the future brings - that is,
unless you have unlimited or sufficient capital to try every new toy
that comes out. Recently, I've seen a couple cheap $400 PC laptops
being sold as a house computer by various large electronics retailers
if you're looking for a laptop on a low budget.
How, you say, will home computing change? Speculating, Apple hardware
will drop in price when Intel gets inside. Future Apple machines may
allow you to run multiple operating systems - Mac OS X and Windows for
example. Steve Jobs may be about to make that Apple so appealing that
a lot of folks can't resist taking a bite. Longhorn will have to be
good to compete with future releases of OS X, so if Microsoft intends
to remain a player, you can count on them clearing up most of the
problems that have kept Windows from excelling - open doors for
viruses and spyware, system bugs, code that discriminates against
competitors (non-Microsoft alternative) software etc. Will Microsoft
turn the Xbox into a computer? Obviously, the smaller footprint is
happening. Mac Mini, Shuttle xPC, etc. Ultimately, maybe your HDTV
monitor will also serve as a computer with voice commands allowing you
to watch digital TV, surf the net or dictate a word processor doc from
your easy chair.

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still others
who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. -
Rudyard Kiplinger

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

I'd bet you think you aren't a troll either.

Well, you would know, wouldn't you? ;)

Nicolas



59. Jim Polaski View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 10:14 pm

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Jim Polaski <jpola...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:14:48 -0500
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 10:14 pm
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <aMlue.51307$Ph4.1403...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,




- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Nasht0n <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:

Jim Polaski wrote:

In article <plYte.31409$J12.8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Slade <hitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Snippage

This newsgroup is like most others - a few who offer helpful and thoughful
advice and opinions, others who wish to share their expertise, still
others
who wish to bludgeon you with it and some just looking for an argument. -
Rudyard Kiplinger

And what do you hope to start with this comparrison between Windows
and OS X? It's trolling for an argument pure and simple.

John

I'd bet you think you aren't a troll either.

Well, you would know, wouldn't you? ;)

Nicolas

Whatever makes you ask that question?

Oh and you still haven't fixed the newsreader sig.


--
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
expecting that he will get nothing in return!"


60. buzz off View profile
More options Jun 22 2005, 10:43 am

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: buzz off <b...@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:43:31 -0400
Local: Wed, Jun 22 2005 10:43 am
Subject: Re: Observations from a simple man . . .
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
In article <oqteb1duhgo49tr3oa0j7vk6d4aaauc...@xxxxxxx>, fruit &


veggies <r...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

The QuickTime synthesizer will not
play complex MIDI files, regardless of the Mac version you own. You
have to buy outboard MIDI hardware or buy a PowerMac and buy a
soundcard that can handle them.

....

I've been able to determine that what is probably causing the file to
stop is that the MIDI is damper pedal heavy - notes hang over and blur
until the sound starts to vibrate until it quits. If one were to
strip out the damper pedal controller events or thin them down, it
might play all the way through. But that would not be an accurate
capture of the performance. If you play the file on Windows Media
Player, vanBasco Karaoke player or any other quality PC player, the
file plays all the way through, although you can still tell that file
is pedal heavy.

Yes, you seem to will have found the limitations of QuickTime.
What I don't understand is why you would think that this is a
limitation of the Macintosh.


If QuickTime is limited, so is the Macintosh - QT ships with every one
of them.


















































--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

.

---

• References:
  • WWDC, new announcements,fix QT & 16 months with Mac and back.
    • From: resolved

• Prev by Date: Re: WWDC, new announcements,fix QT & 16 months with Mac and back.
• Next by Date: Apple iBook G4 Design Flaw Proven
• Previous by thread: Re: WWDC, new announcements,fix QT & 16 months with Mac and back.
• Next by thread: Apple: Fun for you, Toxic for the environment!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

---

Relevant Pages RE: Foxpro Application on Virtual PC for Mac ... of VFP for Windows on Virtual PC for the Mac. ... this question on one of the Macintosh newsgroups. ... >running in a Windows emulation environment on a Macintosh? ... (microsoft.public.fox.programmer.exchange) Re: osx usability for a windows/linux user ... but maybe that is because of my 'windows conditioning'. ... Personally, I welcome xen to the Mac community, and I ... I think the Mac is a great platform, and I continue to recommend it ... That's why I stick to the technical Mac newsgroups, ... (comp.sys.mac.system) Re: "Net Threat Rising" says CR, zara claims otherwise ... >"Macs 'much safer' online than Windows, ... the report categorically states: ... >are safer than Windows PCs for some online hazards. ... Just 8 per cent of Mac ... (comp.sys.mac.advocacy) Re: Printing with Mac Virtual PC ... I never could get it to see my Mac printer. ... Probably there was just no Windows driver for it, ... If you don't use a SET PRINTER TO statement, the app should just use the ... That could cause a report to print with the ... (microsoft.public.fox.programmer.exchange) Re: [Full-disclosure] mac trojan in-the-wild ... Subject: mac trojan in-the-wild ... Not "the new Windows 98" by a long shot - saying that is just ... same way that other companies are, comparing OSX to Windows 98 is not ... If you want to report this, then report it-- but say what it is, a ... (Full-Disclosure)

---

• Security
• UNIX
• Linux
• Coding
• Usenet

• Archive
• About
• Privacy
• Search
• Imprint

newsgroups.derkeiler.com  > Archive  > Comp  > comp.sys.mac.advocacy  > 2007-05