Why do articles without facts like this one and the one recently circulating about european labels fearing Apple's dominance of the music industry suddenly hit the web and then are referenced ad naseum by web sites?
Is there a concerted campaign here?
And why do similar comments like "security through obscurity" come up here as criticism when little or no real examples are shown via the article?
Is this place (and the web) being used for a FUD campaign?
Linux acceptance on the desktop should create a wake for further adoption by the Mac as well.
Proof that companies and/or individuals can successfully windows will also benefit Mac OS X.
It should break a lot of preconcieved barriers about the OS - especially in light of Linux's difficulties.
I expect as Linux share of the market increases, so will the Mac.
And all at the expense of windows - not each other.
That would be a very welcome thing too - we need stronger influencers for standards and common platforms.
it is interesting that OS X and Linux share their code freely, while Windows doesn't. They have more in common with each other than Windows does with either...
Anyway, I could easily see version 10.4 allowing Linux apps to run without any preconfig'ing of the OS if Linux does gain marketshare...that would be a savvy move by apple too.
Here are the issues with the unit as far as I can tell:
1 - Its PC only. Big mistake given the amount of dance music producers who use Macs to create their music. A large portion of users also use Mac laptops using Mac OS X to perform out using Live, Traktor, etc.
2 - Its not preconfiged for Native Instruments' Traktor. This is the premium MP3/.Aiff/.wave DJ software application. (Even final scratch is run off a slimmed down version of Traktor). All the apps that they included only highlight that this product could be strictly for the bedroom DJ who doesn't actually perform/play music in a club.
3 - The USB 1.1 isn't an issue if you just use it as a controller. However, it appears that they didn't use the USB connection on the unit as a USB MIDI interface, but only for Audio transmission. Big Mistake if this is true (given that there are MIDI I/O on the unit itself, it may be that the USB connection DOES transmit MIDI, but the review or the product specs don't really specify).
4 - It needs to be totally configurable as a MIDI interface alone. Most professional DJs using this type of equipment use high end audio interfaces (like MOTU's 828 (firewire), or Emagic's USB interfaces). But more telling is that the unit, if really expected to replace those audio interfaces used by pro DJs, it should have 1/4" ins and outs so a DJ could use it to connect to an external DJ mixer (like a Pionner DJM-3000 or 600).
(i.e. in the above scenario, the cross fader would not be used on the unit, the external mixer would allow for that. For instance, I have a Pionner DJM-3000, fed inputs from my Mac Laptop running Live and Traktor through a MOTU 828. The DJ mixer provides the master output to the house sound system).
5 - Latency. That should be configurable. This is a benefit of using Mac OS X actually. Its core MIDI/Audio system services are pretty top notch - and depending on your system speed, you can achieve very LOW latency numbers. But that would only be relevant if you used this unit as a primary audio interface.
DJs, btw, ARE using tools like Traktor, Final Scratch, and Ableton's Live to accentuate their music options. The only DJs that aren't are really turtablists who play the turntable like an instrument (i.e. scratching, etc.)
But most who are playing music to a crowd that expects to dance, options are what are most important.
The primary draw for these tools is that DJs have massive amounts of tracks, samples, and loops to use at any gig.
Secondly, the prohibitive cost of producing vinyl is a serious contributing factor to going digital. Its MUCH cheaper, faster, and more realistic to create a track at home, burn it onto a CD, or play it out as an MP3 that night, than it is to have pressed on vinyl.
Tools like this one under review are important and can totally work - if designed correctly. But this one seems to straddle the fence between a consumer product (w/ some good ideas, however) rather than a serious contender for the king of DJ computer interfaces.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Why do articles without facts like this one and the one recently circulating about european labels fearing Apple's dominance of the music industry suddenly hit the web and then are referenced ad naseum by web sites?
Is there a concerted campaign here?
And why do similar comments like "security through obscurity" come up here as criticism when little or no real examples are shown via the article?
Is this place (and the web) being used for a FUD campaign?
hmmmm....
Linux acceptance on the desktop should create a wake for further adoption by the Mac as well.
Proof that companies and/or individuals can successfully windows will also benefit Mac OS X.
It should break a lot of preconcieved barriers about the OS - especially in light of Linux's difficulties.
I expect as Linux share of the market increases, so will the Mac.
And all at the expense of windows - not each other.
That would be a very welcome thing too - we need stronger influencers for standards and common platforms.
it is interesting that OS X and Linux share their code freely, while Windows doesn't. They have more in common with each other than Windows does with either...
Anyway, I could easily see version 10.4 allowing Linux apps to run without any preconfig'ing of the OS if Linux does gain marketshare...that would be a savvy move by apple too.
Here are the issues with the unit as far as I can tell:
:)
1 - Its PC only. Big mistake given the amount of dance music producers who use Macs to create their music. A large portion of users also use Mac laptops using Mac OS X to perform out using Live, Traktor, etc.
2 - Its not preconfiged for Native Instruments' Traktor. This is the premium MP3/.Aiff/.wave DJ software application. (Even final scratch is run off a slimmed down version of Traktor). All the apps that they included only highlight that this product could be strictly for the bedroom DJ who doesn't actually perform/play music in a club.
3 - The USB 1.1 isn't an issue if you just use it as a controller. However, it appears that they didn't use the USB connection on the unit as a USB MIDI interface, but only for Audio transmission. Big Mistake if this is true (given that there are MIDI I/O on the unit itself, it may be that the USB connection DOES transmit MIDI, but the review or the product specs don't really specify).
4 - It needs to be totally configurable as a MIDI interface alone. Most professional DJs using this type of equipment use high end audio interfaces (like MOTU's 828 (firewire), or Emagic's USB interfaces). But more telling is that the unit, if really expected to replace those audio interfaces used by pro DJs, it should have 1/4" ins and outs so a DJ could use it to connect to an external DJ mixer (like a Pionner DJM-3000 or 600).
(i.e. in the above scenario, the cross fader would not be used on the unit, the external mixer would allow for that. For instance, I have a Pionner DJM-3000, fed inputs from my Mac Laptop running Live and Traktor through a MOTU 828. The DJ mixer provides the master output to the house sound system).
5 - Latency. That should be configurable. This is a benefit of using Mac OS X actually. Its core MIDI/Audio system services are pretty top notch - and depending on your system speed, you can achieve very LOW latency numbers. But that would only be relevant if you used this unit as a primary audio interface.
DJs, btw, ARE using tools like Traktor, Final Scratch, and Ableton's Live to accentuate their music options. The only DJs that aren't are really turtablists who play the turntable like an instrument (i.e. scratching, etc.)
But most who are playing music to a crowd that expects to dance, options are what are most important.
The primary draw for these tools is that DJs have massive amounts of tracks, samples, and loops to use at any gig.
Secondly, the prohibitive cost of producing vinyl is a serious contributing factor to going digital. Its MUCH cheaper, faster, and more realistic to create a track at home, burn it onto a CD, or play it out as an MP3 that night, than it is to have pressed on vinyl.
Tools like this one under review are important and can totally work - if designed correctly. But this one seems to straddle the fence between a consumer product (w/ some good ideas, however) rather than a serious contender for the king of DJ computer interfaces.
rob.
aka Robtronik
www.robtronik.com