EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 63, Issue 08 This issue's topics: Mac or IBM ?? (7 messages) MAC OS wars again? (2 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 09:35:39 U From: Scott Drexel Subject: Mac or IBM ?? Mail*Link(r) SMTP Mac or IBM ?? I have a very interesting question for ya'll. I am seriously debating between getting a Mac PowerPC or sticking with my IBM clone. I have tons of software for the IBM and love it, BUT, I see that a lot of peoople who do serious recording use Mac's. I have a 486/66 with 20mb of RAM and tons of hard drive space. To get that in a Mac is going to cost some bucks !!! What do ya'll consider to be the ultimate machine as far as MIDI implementation, and software written for it ? I read an article about recording music for games such as Nintendo, and they said that the standard format they use is Mac. Does pretty much everyone use Macs for sound ?? Mine sounds ok, but I want GREAT !!! Thanks for any input. Also, how about sound cards for the Mac, any preferences ?? Scott Drexel Scott_Drexel@SMTPGW.MUSC.EDU Medical University of S.C. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 09:43:41 -0400 From: "J. M. Macknik" Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? On Wed, 20 Apr 1994, Scott Drexel wrote: > Mail*Link(r) SMTP Mac or IBM ?? > I have a very interesting question for ya'll. I am seriously debating between > getting a Mac PowerPC or sticking with my IBM clone. I have tons of > software for the IBM and love it, BUT, I see that a lot of peoople who do > serious recording use Mac's. I have a 486/66 with 20mb of RAM and tons of > hard drive space. To get that in a Mac is going to cost some bucks !!! > Scott Drexel > Scott_Drexel@SMTPGW.MUSC.EDU > Medical University of S.C. > Scott- Even tho I'm a Mac nut, I wouldn't suggest switching to Mac if you're really that happy with your IBM. Don't switch yet because "everybody else is doing it." I like to see people working on different platforms....different things get accomplished, and the field becomes more interesting. Let's not give anyone the monopoly. Especially don't buy a PowerMac right now if you want to run your PC stuff. Very slow, and probably very buggy when it comes to MIDI stuff. Also, regarding the money thing, it isn't gonna cost you that much to get decent hard-drive and RAM space. Mac is most certainly less drive-space hungry than Windows stuff. Anyway, stick with your IBM if you're happy. That's my two cents. James M. Macknik Data Management Assistant Senior - Connecticut College Dept. of Academic Computing Major - Music & Technology Connecticut College VoiceMail:(203)/439-3333 x5542 Office:(203)/439-2923 E-Mail Address: jmmac@conncoll.edu Internet Address: jmmac@dsys.cc.conncoll.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 20:56:19 -0500 From: "J. Michael Roach" Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? It is my humble opinion that while the Mac used to be the format of choice for the serious electronic musician, the most wonderful software and hardware available (aside from stand-alone pro equipment) is for Windows. There will be those that disagree, however. Stick with the IBM. You will see that at the very least, it is extremely configurable for your every need. J. Michael ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 07:55:00 +0300 From: Dan Bleicher Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? stick with IBM and don't start reinvesting quite yet in the MAC until this new PowerPC business settles down and we now what we're dealing with... probably late this fall or early next year. You've got a lot of IBM horsepower which can do anything with the same accuracy and ease as any MAC. Bleicher, Jerusalem ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 09:18:51 +0100 From: "Steven D. Bramson" Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? Personally I would stick with an IBM PC on a price performance basis. With a Mac, you are restricted to a single supplying company. With a PC there are perhaps a couple of hundred system and component suppliers. This competition keeps prices low. In the UK, prices are 0.60 to 0.70 per MB for hard discs dropping to 0.50 for 1 GB or more (UK pounds). As to which will give you better sound, I think this is more a function of what synths/expanders you hook up to MIDI. Therin Lies another tale. Steven D. Bramson sdb@jet.uk ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 14:46:46 +0100 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? > Especially don't buy a PowerMac right now if you want to run your >PC stuff. Very slow, and probably very buggy when it comes to MIDI >stuff. It apparently all works fine. More compatible than a Mac IIfx... (No surprise there, then.) Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 19:40:05 -0500 From: John Perser Subject: Re: Mac or IBM ?? -> I have a very interesting question for ya'll. I am seriously debating between -> getting a Mac PowerPC or sticking with my IBM clone. I have tons of -> software for the IBM and love it, BUT, I see that a lot of peoople who do -> serious recording use Mac's. I have a 486/66 with 20mb of RAM and tons of -> hard drive space. To get that in a Mac is going to cost some bucks !!! -> What do ya'll consider to be the ultimate machine as far as MIDI -> implementation, and software written for it ? I read an article about -> recording music for games such as Nintendo, and they said that the standard -> format they use is Mac. Does pretty much everyone use Macs for sound ?? -> Mine sounds ok, but I want GREAT !!! Thanks for any input. -> Also, how about sound cards for the Mac, any preferences ?? -> -> Scott Drexel -> Scott_Drexel@SMTPGW.MUSC.EDU -> Medical University of S.C. -> I have used both for years. I would seriously consider the PowerPC. The professional programs that exist today on the Mac are now being ported to the PowerPC macs. You can purchase a 8MB Mac 6100/60 for around 2K. This is with a 230MB hard drive. You will be getting better than Pentium speeds for the price of a really good clone. Most professionals I know use Macs. ----------------------------------------------------------------- John Perser Manager/Audio Products Paradigm Simulation, Inc. email: jperser@paradigmsim.com PHONE: 214-960-2301 FAX: 214-960-2303 AudioWorks: Hear what you are missing ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 10:50:09 -0500 From: Arne Claassen ISE Subject: MAC OS wars again? After the initial "who gets to superseed the MIDImanager" fight was over, MOTU seemed to slink back into a dark corner and Opcode got a lot of people to sign on to use and help develop OMS 2.0. Now that OMS 2.0 is officially announced (has it shipped yet?), MOTU comes back to start another round in the fight. "It happens every time we demonstrate FreeMIDI's auto-config feature in a new studio." And goes on to claim its superiority. Then it lists all the compatible software: Performer, Mosaic, and _any_ FreeMIDI compatible software. Oh, what a relief there is such a large software base that is worth mentioning :) I personnally had given up FreeMIDI for dead and after all this time had hoped it to be this way. It just seems that MOTU really is just trying to pick a fight and certainly doesn't have the good of the end-user who has to deal with these petty incompatibilities. Ok, fine... So Opcode gets most of the credit. But MOTU should really just swallow its pride and join in on making the things about OMS they don't like better, instead of rejecting it and starting from scratch. I forgot to mention that "with FreeMIDI, you're free to run OMS applications with or without MIDImanager or OMS." Sounds more like a heeadache than a feature :) -- Arne F. Claassen ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- <<< From "Netwhore Incantations": Blessed be thy MIDI implementation >>> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 22:13:08 +0100 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: MAC OS wars again? >And goes on to claim its superiority. Then it lists all the compatible >software: Performer, Mosaic, and _any_ FreeMIDI compatible software. Oh, what >a relief there is such a large software base that is worth mentioning :) Any FreeMIDI compatible software is compatible with FreeMIDI, huh? That's rather a relief; they might have some serious compatibility problems otherwise... >It just seems that MOTU really is just trying to pick a fight >and certainly doesn't have the good of the end-user who has to deal with these >petty incompatibilities. Correct. They market featurism, not functionality; that's what sells to punters. All in all there's far too much chrome. Well, with Performer 5 on colour screens, it does at least *look* like chrome. Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************