I guess voice control for apps is one angle, but is that technology good enough, and will the hardware here be powerful enough to do it support it reliably?
The guitar is a fairly 'organic' instrument, and that seems to reflect in guitarists' approach to technology. Guitar synths, never caught on the was that their keyboard-driven cousins did. And there are a number of technical innovations which have pretty much been left by the wayside or (at best) only have a very small minority following. I'm thinking of things like SynthAxe, Stepp, etc.
Similarly with amps, ask the majority of players if they'd prefer a traditional valve-driven Marshall stack or one of the new-breed 'virtual amp' modellers, and I think they;d opt for the former.
I'd be suprised if this becomes mainstream within the next 5 years.
There have been a lot of attempts over the years to get guitarists to go hi-tech. Guitar synths never really gained the momentum that they their keyboard-driven cousins, and innovations like the SynthAxe, Step, etc. have pretty much fallen by the wayside.
The guitar is a very 'organic' instrument, and that tends to reflect in the attitudes of people playing it. Personally, I'd be suprised if this technology becomes totally mainstream within the next 5 years.
I'm an old school procedural programmer that is making the rocky transition to OOP programming
I agree whole-heartedly with what you say about code re-use. However I wouldn't see this as being a feature solely of OOP. Get the design right, and you can have some equally tight, highly-reusable procedural code.
I work in a professional software house, and a while back I write a utility to trawl through some source code for an application and extract the comments. The ratio of 'practical' comments to frustration-venting, sideswiping and humour ran at about 50:50.
One member of the team has a reputation for doing useful but wacky things, and most of examples of his code were prefixed with/* Trust me...I know what I'm doing */
At some point a bug-fix had been applied by a junior programmer, prefixed by/* don't trust me...I may not know what he was doing */
Slashdot Mirror
I guess voice control for apps is one angle, but is that technology good enough, and will the hardware here be powerful enough to do it support it reliably?
In high school I did a 2 year Computer Studies course.
During that period, one night I went to a heavy party and then spent the following day trying to write functional code whilst suffering a hangover.
This was the only experience from the course which mirrored anything which happened to me since I started programming professionally
I presume that the natural choice of language to develop this software would be C#
The guitar is a fairly 'organic' instrument, and that seems to reflect in guitarists' approach to technology. Guitar synths, never caught on the was that their keyboard-driven cousins did. And there are a number of technical innovations which have pretty much been left by the wayside or (at best) only have a very small minority following. I'm thinking of things like SynthAxe, Stepp, etc.
Similarly with amps, ask the majority of players if they'd prefer a traditional valve-driven Marshall stack or one of the new-breed 'virtual amp' modellers, and I think they;d opt for the former.
I'd be suprised if this becomes mainstream within the next 5 years.
There have been a lot of attempts over the years to get guitarists to go hi-tech. Guitar synths never really gained the momentum that they their keyboard-driven cousins, and innovations like the SynthAxe, Step, etc. have pretty much fallen by the wayside. The guitar is a very 'organic' instrument, and that tends to reflect in the attitudes of people playing it. Personally, I'd be suprised if this technology becomes totally mainstream within the next 5 years.
I'm an old school procedural programmer that is making the rocky transition to OOP programming
I agree whole-heartedly with what you say about code re-use. However I wouldn't see this as being a feature solely of OOP. Get the design right, and you can have some equally tight, highly-reusable procedural code.
I work in a professional software house, and a while back I write a utility to trawl through some source code for an application and extract the comments. The ratio of 'practical' comments to frustration-venting, sideswiping and humour ran at about 50:50.
/* Trust me...I know what I'm doing */
/* don't trust me...I may not know what he was doing */
One member of the team has a reputation for doing useful but wacky things, and most of examples of his code were prefixed with
At some point a bug-fix had been applied by a junior programmer, prefixed by