Tom, I am not against closed source!!!
no no no no!!!
closed or open, is a matter of manufacturer's preference.
I am reading the posts you've mentioned. give me some time to read.
OK.
I've read it.
I insist on chicken-egg effect.
I insist linux codebase is not crap. It's not perfect.
But it certainly get things done better, faster, easier for companies that work close to audio:
Dreamworks, as an example.
The 3-D rendering done by linux farms is something windows system can only dream of: 100% uptime, higher hardware utilization, lower maintenance overhead.
This is what you need for audio.
So it's up to some brave manufacturer to go for it.
I hoped Creamware could do this, but after being burnt with ALSA ( I suppose they tried to use ALSA, which demands Opening the Source ), and they should have been going towards commercial OSS.
OSS v.4 is up and running, for some commercial closed source cards it works better than ALSA.
And, of course, I do think Linux in audio hasn't said the "last word".
Cheers,
and happy new year ! ( to those who refer to it )
giving linux a shot
well, I didn't relate your position to Open Source at all - you seem to be well informed about both community and commercial applications under Linux.
I never questioned that Linux is a good Server OS, or great for cluster computing, embedded applications etc.
In other words: as long as it's about the techie side of things or isolated problems, Linux developers seem to achieve respectable results.
But as soon as it's about usability or integration of some (more or less) abstract entities under one (simple) user interface, they (mostly) fail.
That's why I frequently mentioned Apple's GUI part of OSX (a flavour of BSD unix), as an example how 'easily' this can be achieved.
In fact it's not a question between Open versus Closed Source
According to my own experience 'commercial' aspects have a significant impact on motivation and creativity, but that's only loosely related to this special case.
To be precise, the point is not to have a Scope card under Linux with some audio IO via a handful of 5532 Opamps and some AKM Converters.
This would be plain nonsense because there are affordable cards with similiar hardware and comparable audio quality running under Linux.
The point is to have DSP processing, the DSP summing engine, FX processing on DSPs, etc.
So before you can even think of a tiny little poo-poo-multi-media-audio 'driver', you gotta load the card...
That's what all the IP rant is about
And you bet that in such well documented terrain as a Linux kernel this part of controlling the card will be like an open book
with or without 'documentation' - imho.
cheers, Tom
I never questioned that Linux is a good Server OS, or great for cluster computing, embedded applications etc.
In other words: as long as it's about the techie side of things or isolated problems, Linux developers seem to achieve respectable results.
But as soon as it's about usability or integration of some (more or less) abstract entities under one (simple) user interface, they (mostly) fail.
That's why I frequently mentioned Apple's GUI part of OSX (a flavour of BSD unix), as an example how 'easily' this can be achieved.
In fact it's not a question between Open versus Closed Source
According to my own experience 'commercial' aspects have a significant impact on motivation and creativity, but that's only loosely related to this special case.
To be precise, the point is not to have a Scope card under Linux with some audio IO via a handful of 5532 Opamps and some AKM Converters.
This would be plain nonsense because there are affordable cards with similiar hardware and comparable audio quality running under Linux.
The point is to have DSP processing, the DSP summing engine, FX processing on DSPs, etc.
So before you can even think of a tiny little poo-poo-multi-media-audio 'driver', you gotta load the card...
That's what all the IP rant is about
And you bet that in such well documented terrain as a Linux kernel this part of controlling the card will be like an open book
with or without 'documentation' - imho.
cheers, Tom
-
bilbobugginz
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:06 am
you meant the point is to have the access to all the DSP functions and applications.astroman wrote: The point is to have DSP processing, the DSP summing engine, FX processing on DSPs, etc.
So before you can even think of a tiny little poo-poo-multi-media-audio 'driver', you gotta load the card...
That's what all the IP rant is about
And you bet that in such well documented terrain as a Linux kernel this part of controlling the card will be like an open book
with or without 'documentation' - imho.
OK. So, If you mean that under linux it is easier to reverse engineer them,
you're SO WRONG!!
The proof of this is the existence of warez of creamware plugins.
Do they exist ?
If they do, a more serious engineer can do more than "workaround" protections.
It's like a poo-game. Everybody gets dirty in that brown substance.
It's no excuse.
Why do nVidia cards ship their drivers in binary only form ?
Aren't they afraid that somebody might learn how they implement their stuff ?
Just for your information, many other hardware devices work on that principle:
1. initialize device,
2. load higher level firmware
3. inialize applications.
As to the interface differences...
Man, come on!
All the linux interfaces mimic or "explore further" all the existing ideas of user interface...well not exactly.
For example multiple "desktops", in mac called "spaces" exist quite long enough in linux/FreeBSD.
Same is about "Stacks" on OS X, or "Widgets", all these exist VERY long ago.
WindowMaker was "stacks" based (in the early 90's)
Widgets were called "Dock Apps"
Besides, today's linux interface is so flexible you can make it "feel" like either windows or mac. So, this excuse is TOO not accepted
The only excuse I could accept is lack of support, bad logistics of linux.
But, man you have all these Ubuntu commercial support, IBM supports linux, HP too. DELL ship laptops with linux.
And the so called "real time priority" is something that only ALSA drivers need.
In any stock linux system today's OSS drivers can achieve realtime performance without requiring the realtime capabilities (Which required specially compiled kernel)
So, given one want to give it a shot, they get ubuntu, download it, install it, download oss drivers, install them. and there they are.
And, BEFORE doing so, one should check if the hardware is supported.
-
hubird
sorry, I never wrote the latter. I only mentioned DSPs because about a hundred morons in the past repeatingly posted their ...but all we want is a simple driver to begin with... blurbbilbobugginz wrote:...you meant the point is to have the access to all the DSP functions and applications.
OK. So, If you mean that under linux it is easier to reverse engineer them,
you're SO WRONG!!
there is no such thing, as any function the card provides is defined by software controlling the DSPs. You either got full control or nothing at all - no half pregnacy
exactly - you name the problem.As to the interface differences...
Man, come on!
All the linux interfaces mimic or "explore further" all the existing ideas of user interface...well not exactly.
For example multiple "desktops", in mac called "spaces" exist quite long enough in linux/FreeBSD.
...
Besides, today's linux interface is so flexible you can make it "feel" like either windows or mac. So, this excuse is TOO not accepted
it looks identical, so it got to be identical - but then a config script here, an option there, a cryptic message about I dunnowhat...
Give me one distribution that installs without any of these and I will use it.
It is not the point that I cannot handle it the otherv way - I just don't want to.
After 20 years of experience in developement I know for sure that this sh*t on the user interface side isn't necessary anymore since 1985.
If it amuses the Linux geeks, so be it - but please don't call it 'userfriendly' then
before you say but it looks like OSX... try to find out if it also 'feels' like it, because the latter will do exactly what I demanded above.
In my personal opinion OSX is a piece a crap compared to the original Mac OS, which died long ago with version 8.
But regarding the task of hiding operating system complexity from the user, OSX is just a brilliant piece of work.
cheers, Tom
Even with the DSP chips working , it would not be an advantage over other cards like you said Astro, without the SFP platform or something akin to it. I imagine it would not be easy to make something like that and then I would also want a good sequencer. I haven't seen one in Linux as good as Cubase or Logic.
-
kensuguro
- Posts: 4434
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: BPM 60 to somewhere around 150
- Contact:
hm, intersting to see this thread still living.
The development problem of audio, or any other facet of linux in its infancy is the structure of open source / community based development. The group thing creates great collaboration and synergy if it's a small team of selected talented people, but when it's just randomly "everyone who wants to", I think it's easy for it be become an over diluted network of orphaned responsibilities. It's the nature of the beast I think, and it's a tough one to fix. I mean, in Ubuntu studio (gutsy), internet clock syncing doesn't work out of the box if you're using a wired connection. I looked into it, and it turns out that the problem's persisted since 2-3 versions ago. That's serious procrastination and bad management.
I'm sure there are priorities (putting time sync lower on the list), but why so many version updates that introduce a bucket full of other problems? I really can't grasp how the dev cycle works for linux community.
There are quite a lot of things that need to be cleared before linux becomes remotely close to becoming a passable (not "awesome") audio platform. Driver support frankly, I don't think is too big of a problem. They support m-audio stuff, and soundblaster series, so while that cuts them off from the majority of adult pro users, it's good enough for youngsters and hobbyists to try out, to see if it works. It's a big part of the market so that's important. The installation is also fine. Also, with proper setup, the audio performance was just fine, with latencies under or around 10ms. My dualhead was a pain to set up, but you can survive with 1 monitor to check things out.
Now, let's say I didn't use linux at work (just for svn and I was not a developer (not hard core, I'm just a flash dev), I probably would have given up long before this point. But let's say people get up to this point. Even still, the big problem is the software: sequencer, instruments, and effects. Everything is all over the place, and the quality is so diverse, that just selecting what's usable and not, is a very time consuming task. Considering how many pieces of software is even passable (not "awesome"), the filtering process is completely inefficient.
In the real world, there are deadlines, responsibilities, liabilities, political work relationships to keep, a success streak to maintain, and ultimately, if you mess up too much, you get fired with little or no chance to recover in the same industry. (in some industries) I feel the linux dev community (atleast audio) doesn't share most of these qualities, and so mixing the two worlds is dangerous. It's like putting a person who is an expert at Need For Speed(game) on a real racing track, where the possibility to die is a very realistic factor. Ultimately it becomes a business liability that I am not willing to risk.
I think one thing that gets overlooked is that when you're making money, investing money to make more money isn't a problem. (not that I make a living on music alone) Being free, isn't that big of a deal. I think paying money to filter out crap makes perfect sense. It's all about liability control. There is almost absolutely no guarantee in the linux world.
I'd like to keep hope, but it's just so far from being in the proper dimension. On the other hand, I did keep the linux install, and use it occasionally to enjoy the fast interface. like right now. hehe. It's really awesome in that sense.
I do agree in principle.. I think it's a very tough comparison to compare linux audio to linux video/3-d because linux 3-d has been under heavy development for quite some time now, by highly qualified professionals. The difference with commercial linux based render farms and homebrew-style audio software we have right now is that 3D productions usually write their own software in house. It's obviously required to clear intellectual property issues (I think), configuration freedom, and probably most important of all, liability. It will foolish for a company to base their business on something they don't know who is liable for if it fails.The 3-D rendering done by linux farms is something windows system can only dream of: 100% uptime, higher hardware utilization, lower maintenance overhead.
This is what you need for audio.
The development problem of audio, or any other facet of linux in its infancy is the structure of open source / community based development. The group thing creates great collaboration and synergy if it's a small team of selected talented people, but when it's just randomly "everyone who wants to", I think it's easy for it be become an over diluted network of orphaned responsibilities. It's the nature of the beast I think, and it's a tough one to fix. I mean, in Ubuntu studio (gutsy), internet clock syncing doesn't work out of the box if you're using a wired connection. I looked into it, and it turns out that the problem's persisted since 2-3 versions ago. That's serious procrastination and bad management.
I'm sure there are priorities (putting time sync lower on the list), but why so many version updates that introduce a bucket full of other problems? I really can't grasp how the dev cycle works for linux community.
There are quite a lot of things that need to be cleared before linux becomes remotely close to becoming a passable (not "awesome") audio platform. Driver support frankly, I don't think is too big of a problem. They support m-audio stuff, and soundblaster series, so while that cuts them off from the majority of adult pro users, it's good enough for youngsters and hobbyists to try out, to see if it works. It's a big part of the market so that's important. The installation is also fine. Also, with proper setup, the audio performance was just fine, with latencies under or around 10ms. My dualhead was a pain to set up, but you can survive with 1 monitor to check things out.
Now, let's say I didn't use linux at work (just for svn and I was not a developer (not hard core, I'm just a flash dev), I probably would have given up long before this point. But let's say people get up to this point. Even still, the big problem is the software: sequencer, instruments, and effects. Everything is all over the place, and the quality is so diverse, that just selecting what's usable and not, is a very time consuming task. Considering how many pieces of software is even passable (not "awesome"), the filtering process is completely inefficient.
In the real world, there are deadlines, responsibilities, liabilities, political work relationships to keep, a success streak to maintain, and ultimately, if you mess up too much, you get fired with little or no chance to recover in the same industry. (in some industries) I feel the linux dev community (atleast audio) doesn't share most of these qualities, and so mixing the two worlds is dangerous. It's like putting a person who is an expert at Need For Speed(game) on a real racing track, where the possibility to die is a very realistic factor. Ultimately it becomes a business liability that I am not willing to risk.
I think one thing that gets overlooked is that when you're making money, investing money to make more money isn't a problem. (not that I make a living on music alone) Being free, isn't that big of a deal. I think paying money to filter out crap makes perfect sense. It's all about liability control. There is almost absolutely no guarantee in the linux world.
I'd like to keep hope, but it's just so far from being in the proper dimension. On the other hand, I did keep the linux install, and use it occasionally to enjoy the fast interface. like right now. hehe. It's really awesome in that sense.
-
kensuguro
- Posts: 4434
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: BPM 60 to somewhere around 150
- Contact:
but you have the right to demand results. That the same for most commercial software, and even for some of linux's well written software. It's not a guarantee that someone will fix it if it breaks. It's a guarantee that the software will give you reliable results and not break in the first place. The audio softwares on PC or Mac give you reliable results. It doesn't matter how efficiently coded linux audio software is, if as a whole, it can't produce results, it's worthless to me. Each individual piece of software may be cool, but they just don't combine very well. ("if it's broken, you can fix it because it's open source!" is a bad excuse) And again, there are many things that linux can do extremely reliably, just that audio isn't one of them yet.
I'd like to clarify that my whole thing with linux has nothing to do with which OS is better. The biggest problem is with the set of software that is available. The OS itself is fine if you stay within day-to-day web browsing/email/word processing, or perhaps video/3D or other genres that linux is already proficient at. For ex, I think Blender is a solid matured 3D tool that might stand simple commercial work. (I've only messed with it) Audio just needs something like that, that has a solid, established workflow with most importantly, reliable results. I also don't see the point in having to do so much research just to get some of the most simplest things done. That's just inefficient no matter how you look at it.
I'd like to clarify that my whole thing with linux has nothing to do with which OS is better. The biggest problem is with the set of software that is available. The OS itself is fine if you stay within day-to-day web browsing/email/word processing, or perhaps video/3D or other genres that linux is already proficient at. For ex, I think Blender is a solid matured 3D tool that might stand simple commercial work. (I've only messed with it) Audio just needs something like that, that has a solid, established workflow with most importantly, reliable results. I also don't see the point in having to do so much research just to get some of the most simplest things done. That's just inefficient no matter how you look at it.
-
bilbobugginz
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:06 am
-
kensuguro
- Posts: 4434
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: BPM 60 to somewhere around 150
- Contact:
ya, the bottom line is, linux feels like a tank. Actually, it's more like a formula 1 car. If it is tweaked and set up right, it will perform. It also takes lots of training to drive one, and with the training, you can enjoy the full spectrum of what the machine has to offer. I don't mind the fine tuning and reading and researching, if the end result is worth it. Again, I'm really a supporter of the idea of a linux based audio system, but it has to pass certain tests before I can adopt it as a primary production line. Some day, I hope this will happen.
I'm not sure if I've done this earlier, but here are things that linux kicks serious arses at:
1. GUI freedom. For the most part, you can choose between KDE, GNOME, xfce, or command line. All of them are blazing fast compared to PC/OSX counterparts because of lower resource requirements. Now, some programs only come in certain flavors of GUI (like some only come in KDE) but ubuntu is cross compatible, or you can switch between different GUIs. (I haven't done it, and it sounds complicated)
2. Installation of Ubuntu is a breeze. In contrast to earlier (10 years ago) linux distros, recent ones like Fedora, Ubuntu, and simpler ones like puppy linux, are all pretty much easy to install. You can download a live CD (or DVD), boot from it, and try it out. If you like, you can install it from there. Hardware is detected, and most of the stuff works out of the box. Video driver is the only thing that needs attention, esp if it's a smoking hot new board.
3. System settings are much easier now, with an easy to understand control panel/system setting style GUI that allows you to graphically set things up. With Ubuntu Fiesty, and Gutsy, this works very well, and I'm sure most of the modern distros based on KDE or GNOME does this too. Seriously tweaking your system will still require script editing and countless hours of reading through forums, but at least the control panel gives you access to the bare minimum without too much hassle.
4. When software is written well in linux, these guys are SERIOUS. Well written software will run so fast, it will burn a hole through your CPU. Hats off to these the people who can pull this off, seriously.
Explanation of some Linux gibberish:
KDE, GNOME, xfce: these are window managers, which in PC/OSX speak, is the part of the OS that handles drawing windows and such. In linux, these are called DESKTOP ENVIRONMENTS, and encompasses the GUI plus some basic functionality like system preference tools, system toolbar, etc. (things that are system standard, pretty much)
Fiesty, Gutsy: To be more cryptic and confusing, Ubuntu (which is a very popular flavour of linux) uses codenames. Ubuntu 7.04 is "Fiesty Fawn" and 7.10 is "Gusty Gibbon". I think 6.06 was "Dapper Drake". So, it goes by alphabetical order. I think it's funny, and makes things easier to search for... (search: "cannot install fiesty fawn") but still, confusing.
I'm not sure if I've done this earlier, but here are things that linux kicks serious arses at:
1. GUI freedom. For the most part, you can choose between KDE, GNOME, xfce, or command line. All of them are blazing fast compared to PC/OSX counterparts because of lower resource requirements. Now, some programs only come in certain flavors of GUI (like some only come in KDE) but ubuntu is cross compatible, or you can switch between different GUIs. (I haven't done it, and it sounds complicated)
2. Installation of Ubuntu is a breeze. In contrast to earlier (10 years ago) linux distros, recent ones like Fedora, Ubuntu, and simpler ones like puppy linux, are all pretty much easy to install. You can download a live CD (or DVD), boot from it, and try it out. If you like, you can install it from there. Hardware is detected, and most of the stuff works out of the box. Video driver is the only thing that needs attention, esp if it's a smoking hot new board.
3. System settings are much easier now, with an easy to understand control panel/system setting style GUI that allows you to graphically set things up. With Ubuntu Fiesty, and Gutsy, this works very well, and I'm sure most of the modern distros based on KDE or GNOME does this too. Seriously tweaking your system will still require script editing and countless hours of reading through forums, but at least the control panel gives you access to the bare minimum without too much hassle.
4. When software is written well in linux, these guys are SERIOUS. Well written software will run so fast, it will burn a hole through your CPU. Hats off to these the people who can pull this off, seriously.
Explanation of some Linux gibberish:
KDE, GNOME, xfce: these are window managers, which in PC/OSX speak, is the part of the OS that handles drawing windows and such. In linux, these are called DESKTOP ENVIRONMENTS, and encompasses the GUI plus some basic functionality like system preference tools, system toolbar, etc. (things that are system standard, pretty much)
Fiesty, Gutsy: To be more cryptic and confusing, Ubuntu (which is a very popular flavour of linux) uses codenames. Ubuntu 7.04 is "Fiesty Fawn" and 7.10 is "Gusty Gibbon". I think 6.06 was "Dapper Drake". So, it goes by alphabetical order. I think it's funny, and makes things easier to search for... (search: "cannot install fiesty fawn") but still, confusing.
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 1104
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: paname
well said ken. If I may, you could have added a #5:
Performance. As an example (ok, maybe to brag a bit) I have fedora 6 installed here and this machine is hosting XP in a vm (my wife's computer); then it is configured as a web hosting/development environment running eclipse, dbxml, apache and tomcat. azureus is downloading half the universe continuously, it's got ftp, webdav, cvs running has servers; samba hosts a windows network; phpBB2/mySQL also online etc.. this is all running on a 6 years old P4B533 (ok its got 2 gigs of ram in there)... I mean the thing almost always run 2 jvms at once! I can't remember the last time it was rebooted. I won't even bother to configure vista this way. Now, was it long to configure? YOU BET! took me 3 weeks part time and I used to be a programmer for 15 years. But now I merely touch it as it just does everything I wanted it to without asking questions
ken's test emphasizes that it can't be used for serious audio production and I agree with him (we have sfp). But this won't last, I think
Performance. As an example (ok, maybe to brag a bit) I have fedora 6 installed here and this machine is hosting XP in a vm (my wife's computer); then it is configured as a web hosting/development environment running eclipse, dbxml, apache and tomcat. azureus is downloading half the universe continuously, it's got ftp, webdav, cvs running has servers; samba hosts a windows network; phpBB2/mySQL also online etc.. this is all running on a 6 years old P4B533 (ok its got 2 gigs of ram in there)... I mean the thing almost always run 2 jvms at once! I can't remember the last time it was rebooted. I won't even bother to configure vista this way. Now, was it long to configure? YOU BET! took me 3 weeks part time and I used to be a programmer for 15 years. But now I merely touch it as it just does everything I wanted it to without asking questions
ken's test emphasizes that it can't be used for serious audio production and I agree with him (we have sfp). But this won't last, I think
Especially not with Windows, since laptops are sold with OEM versions. At least on Macs there's no such thing as OEM.stardust wrote:Even if in Linux world you cannot through your notebook on the table and say 'fix it or I get my money back', this is not the case with OSX and Windows either.....
I've seen tens of workmates buying a laptop the last year. They are top of the line machines, kind a gift from the company in our lay-off program, costing about 1600eu w/o tax). Some crashed randomly on simple tasks, like playback of the ATI built-in demo video.
These people went to the shop where they bought it, and the manufacturer of the machines consequentially states "ask MS it's their OS" and MS claims not to be responsible for the manufacturer's OEM of the MS OS. So as owner, you're always screwed when something goes wrong. Many of my workmates have sold their machines recently eh.
more has been done with less
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
-
kensuguro
- Posts: 4434
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: BPM 60 to somewhere around 150
- Contact:
heh, strange.. guess with linux at least the problem isn't random crashes but more like software not being put together correctly. (bad scripts, wrong version, etc) It would take a comet to take down a linux machine. My svn linux box at work had a broken backup script (which I wrote) that backed up too much, and filled up the HD. But the machine was running with a full drive, with svn still functioning for a full 2 weeks before I found out. That's amazing.
-
ScofieldKid
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Oregon
- Contact:
Just happened to be messing around with some stuff today.
I have a simple test working/playing right at the moment:
freebob
Focusrite Saffire LE
Ubuntu 7.10 Desktop
jackd/qjackctl/Rhythmbox Player
Ubuntu is pretty crazy about device and other permissions
but you can make it fly by running jackd as root, and qjackctl
as root. (Yes, yes, yes. There are better ways to fix that,
but for now, I just wanted to report that this is a "working"
set of tools.)
I'll try and test the recording piece later.
I have a simple test working/playing right at the moment:
freebob
Focusrite Saffire LE
Ubuntu 7.10 Desktop
jackd/qjackctl/Rhythmbox Player
Ubuntu is pretty crazy about device and other permissions
but you can make it fly by running jackd as root, and qjackctl
as root. (Yes, yes, yes. There are better ways to fix that,
but for now, I just wanted to report that this is a "working"
set of tools.)
I'll try and test the recording piece later.
Keeping interest alive
Hi guys, I've been lurking around for years but rarely posted.
I'm typing this on a linux box, which hosts as well W2K and the reason for the latter, my beloved PowerPulsar!
I'd be the happiest man if I could forego Micro$oft and just use Debian, even with the xite-1.
I really hope that the new SonicCore team is going to release linux drivers or even just info to programmers, in that case I would be much more interested in the new hardware when it'll come out.
Let's keep the platform interesting in an area that is spreading like wildfire, everybody'll have to admit that, especially since Vista came out, more and more people are turning to linux.
I have to add, the whole SFP software feels alien within a Window$/Mac context, but would be right at home on some linux environments!
Bye guys, take care!
Greetings from "sunny"
Tuscany,
Giovanni
I'm typing this on a linux box, which hosts as well W2K and the reason for the latter, my beloved PowerPulsar!
I'd be the happiest man if I could forego Micro$oft and just use Debian, even with the xite-1.
I really hope that the new SonicCore team is going to release linux drivers or even just info to programmers, in that case I would be much more interested in the new hardware when it'll come out.
Let's keep the platform interesting in an area that is spreading like wildfire, everybody'll have to admit that, especially since Vista came out, more and more people are turning to linux.
I have to add, the whole SFP software feels alien within a Window$/Mac context, but would be right at home on some linux environments!
Bye guys, take care!
Greetings from "sunny"
Tuscany,Giovanni
-
hubird
Re: Keeping interest alive
it doesn't feel anything, it just works as supposed on my macsonagiovi wrote:I have to add, the whole SFP software feels alien within a Window$/Mac context, i