Subject: MAX Digest - 13 Feb 1998 to 14 Feb 1998
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 00:01:41 -0500
From: Automatic digest processor 
Reply-To: MAX - interactive music/multimedia standard environments
     
To: Recipients of MAX digests 

There are 10 messages totalling 340 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. mac-kb for partch
  2. Rhapsody
  3. MAX Digest - 12 Feb 1998 to 13 Feb 1998
  4. Mac OS rumor
  5. MacOS Rumor/Rhapsody (2)
  6. Talking out of my OS
  7. video projectors
  8. 3.5.? update advice? (2)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 19:41:37 +0000
From:    BUYO-BUYO-IGOR 
Subject: mac-kb for partch

Hi!
BUYO-BUYO-IGOR had uploaded a MAX patch to
play Partchy 43-tone-tuning things with Mac's keyboard:
http://www.mars.dti.ne.jp/~buyobuyo/nisanisa/cpartch.zip
there's no DOCs so maybe hard to find out witch note is where..
...and when recording...the bend data seems to be not correctly saved..
does somebody want to try this one?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
BUYO-BUYO-IGOR
SaRiGaMa's Oil Vending Orchestra
Japanese HomePage = http://come.to/sarigama
International Homepage = http://www.mars.dti.ne.jp/~buyobuyo
gianthead@bigfoot.com

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 09:25:10 -0500
From:    "Andy K." 
Subject: Re: Rhapsody

In regards to:

""I've heard from a friend in the industry that he believes Rhapsody is in
""the process of disappearing, or being phased out.

Although the possibility is always there(people have been saying Apple
will be phased out any day now), Rhapsody has been released to developers,
and app's are already being developed.  Anything is possible, but it would
be a great loss to many if Apple did something as brash as that.

""MicroSoft was recently asked about their future Macintosh support they
""replied that they would continue to support the "Mac OS", when pressed
""on the subject of Rhapsody they repeated that they would continue to
""support the "Mac OS".

It makes sense that Microsoft would not support Rhapsody.  It means
another OS they need to design app's for, and most of all(if Rhapsody is
everything it's touted to be) it means a better OS than 95, NT, and many
unix ports.  Plus, on top of that Rhapsody will have the capability to run
all of these(and MacOS) on top of itself.

I can't speak for Jobs, I personally don't agree with all the directions
he's pushing Apple.  I hope that Rhapsody is not on it's way out.  If so
then the limitations of the MacOS, and the cost of developing the platform
will eventually kill the platform.

Andy

*******************************************************************
*Andrew Kuritzky              *  kuritzky@stetson.edu             *
*Stetson University, #5986    *  http://www.stetson.edu/~kuritzky *
*421 N. Woodland Blvd.        *                                   *
*Deland, FL 32720             *  (904)738-6704                    *
*******************************************************************

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 09:29:36 -0500
From:    Tom Ritchford 
Subject: Re: MAX Digest - 12 Feb 1998 to 13 Feb 1998

Tommy DOG  wrote:
>
>Dear Uncle Max,
>I've heard from a friend in the industry that he believes Rhapsody is in
>the process of disappearing, or being phased out.  From what I understand
>when MicroSoft was recently asked about their future Macintosh support they
>replied that they would continue to support the "Mac OS", when pressed on
>the subject of Rhapsody they repeated that they would continue to support
>the "Mac OS". This stance by MicroSoft coupled with the fact that the
>future operating system has been noticeably left out of speeches by Steve
>Jobs makes some of us wonder.

No, no... Rhapsody or a variation of it is probably going to be Mac OS 8.2.
There's no evidence that Apple is not moving towards Rhapsody, and in fact
they are several developer releases to the good already.

Look at

http://www.macosrumors.com/rhapinfo.html

for more information.

If Apple gave up development of Rhapsody, they might as well close their
doors.  I personally would not be sticking with the Mac unless they had
a real multi-tasking OS coming out very soon.

        /t

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 17:11:35 +0100
From:    Peter Castine 
Subject: Re: Mac OS rumor

Tommy DOG  wrote:
>I've heard from a friend in the industry that he believes Rhapsody is in
>the process of disappearing, or being phased out.  From what I understand
>when MicroSoft was recently asked about their future Macintosh support they
>replied that they would continue to support the "Mac OS", when pressed on
>the subject of Rhapsody they repeated that they would continue to support
>the "Mac OS".

Well, (he remarks naively), isn't Rhapsody just the interim name for
MacOS 9? As Copland was the name for OS 8.

Using a code name gives Apple some elbow room between what they're
dreaming for in the next system update and what they actually deliver
when they call it OS number-whatever. Like we were once told Copland was
going to be able to do a couple of things that OS 8 doesn't (like "hot"
find windows that auto-updated every time a Finder change modified just
which documents fulfilled the search criteria you had specified, to name
just one thing).

But back to my naive comment: If Rhapsody is just the proto-MacOS 9,
well, Macrosoft's commitment to support MacOS is just fine and dandy (not
that Bill Gates' promises have ever meant an aweful lot).

Cheers,

Peter

---------------- http://www.prz.tu-berlin.de/~pcastine/ ----------------
Dr. Peter Castine              | I will not cut corners.
pcastine@prz.tu-berlin.de      | "  "    "   "     "
                               | "  "    "   "     "
                               | "  "    "   "

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 11:58:31 -0500
From:    Johnny DeKam 
Subject: MacOS Rumor/Rhapsody

Though I haven't heard any "insider" information pertaining to Rhapsody, if
one looks at Apple's moves over the past year, one might come to these
conclusions... (or at least this is how I see it)

Apple has been very good at keeping things pretty sly as to their plans -
what they have "up their sleave" so to speak.  Take as an example their
somewhat shocking move to pull OS8 Licensing from the clone makers... it
was quite shocking when they acquired Power Computing, everyone saw it as a
mistake - several months later came the G3, record sales and the first
profit in years.  The G3, with its high performance/cost ratio was Apple's
"ace".

Apple bought NeXt... so what?  Anyone who's actually used a NeXt or NeXt OS
knows that it was (is?) the best OS in terms of architecture and
performance.  Apple bought the code and the talent from NeXt so that they
wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel with Rhapsody.  With the NeXt code at
the core, Rhapsody will have all the robustness of a true Network OS (NOS)
(like preemptive multitasking for one) plus the ease of use MacOS.

Note the word "Network" which is key here.  The writing is on the wall.
I'm sitting in my residential apartment in Troy New York, a mid to lower
class river town, and I have a 150k/second ethernet connection via cable
modem - for only $40 a month.  The networked society WILL come... its only
a matter of time.  Apple knows this, Microsoft knows this.  With 40%+ of
web sites being authored on the Mac platform, Apple is in a good position
to serve that content as well, if they only had an OS that performed as
well as unix, (or I dare say NT).
Note also Apple's close relationship with Oracle, who hates Microsoft and
believes that network computing is the future of PC's.  My point here is
that Apple's future relies on a new, robust OS - to think they would dump
it is silly... what else could they do to survive?

Microsoft's position:  well, since the other feature of Mac's new OS is
that it is hardware agnostic, of course Bill Gates won't support it --
think about it - Rhapsody will compete directly with Windows NT, AND will
run on the Intel Platform!

By the way, I've been meaning to ask if anyone has installed or is using
the Rhapsody Developer's release?  I'm thinking about getting it and and
giving it a spin.

Rest assured, Apple is not going to dump Rhapsody - they have to pull off
some real tricks to make it work, to get to market, and to actually compete
with Microsoft - thats another issue, but in my eyes, it is Apple's future,
perhaps their ONLY future.

JdK

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 12:13:29 -0500
From:    Tommy DOG 
Subject: Talking out of my OS

Dear Uncle Max,
After so many distressed flames, idiotic notes and several very paranoid
ramblings, I felt I should make some further comment on this topic.

[INSERT SOUND: "Flogging a dead horse"]

I probably was wrong for posting this somewhat off topic rumor about the
Rhapsody operating system. Yes, rumors like this are probably bad for Apple
but as a long time and heavily invested user* I personally thought this
information was "interesting" AND disconcerting. Yes, some of you were
right. Apple Computing does not need my help in screwing up any chance they
have of survival and Lord knows my post yesterday might well be the straw
that broke the camel's back.

I did not intend to make a bad situation worse.

BUT....

I think that acting like everything is fine as long as we don't talk about
it is very stupid.  The situation with what I consider the better platform
seems dire and I am not going to pretend I feel otherwise.  My hope is that
Apple will make all their source code public when the bell tolls, I would
rather the Macintosh's survival be reliant on it's users then on it's
maker. It seems to me that WE are more passionate then THEM.
TD
PS I am actually typing this on a Wintel PC so I must truely be a spy.

*Apple investments: Apple II/e, Macintosh IIcx, Macintosh IIsi, Macintosh
Quadra 650, Power Macintosh 8500/132, various mice, monitors, keyboards
etc....
-Also 20 shares of stock received as a Bar Mitzvah present in March of 1981.

"Death To The Dumb, Curses Upon The Heads Of The Weird"
                     Tommy DOG
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/3976/uni.html
http://www.mindspring.com/~jjprinz/uni-mirror/uni.html

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 09:35:50 -0800
From:    Bob Gonsalves 
Subject: Re: MacOS Rumor/Rhapsody

As a part time Rhapsody developer I find these rumors about its demise to
be pretty ridiculous. Apple is getting set to release another developer
version and there's absolutely no indication that they're abandoning
efforts here.

The Blue Box, that is, the Mac OS on top of Rhapsody, works quite well
(with some caveats, like sound and serial support) and seems to me to be a
brilliant piece of work.

What would be really interesting is to see where this rumor originated. I
would bet it started not in Cupertino, CA but in Redmond, WA ...

Bob Gonsalves, Research Director
Pink Noise Studios              Art*Technology*Politics
home: http://www.pinknoiz.com/

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 20:36:29 +0100
From:    Jeffrey Burns 
Subject: video projectors

>Can anyone recommend a performance setup for video with a Powerbook?  When
>using a video projector is it possible to zoom in on a portion of the
screen
>for example 320x240?  How does this work?  My movies are currently full
screen
>but this of course will slow things down.  What video projector is
>recommended?  I am currently using a 5300cs Powerbook.  Is it possible to
zoom
>in on a portion of the screen using an external monitor?

In my last show I used a Sanyo LCP 750 ME. It costs about $10,000, and with
1000 ANSI lumens it was capable of projecting to a size of about 20 x 30
feet with amazing brilliance. It has data and video inputs, so you can
attach it to the monitor output of your Mac and adjust it like a multisync
monitor. I had it going on 480x640 pixels at 75 hz.

As you have obviously observed, full screen movies won't play smoothly
above about 6 fps. (This depends, of course, on which codec you use, and
QuickTime 3.0 is supposed to have some fantastic new ones.) If you want
real video performance, say 25 fps and 480x640 pixels or more, you'll have
to go for a PCI video board on a desktop Mac, for example, the Miro DC30.

Hope this helps.

Jeff Burns

http://www.snafu.de/~jeff

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 22:59:02 +0100
From:    Eirik Lie 
Subject: 3.5.? update advice?

Asking for a piece of upgrading advice:
At last, after having struggled with Max 2.5.2 on my old IIvx for a number
of years, I finally have got a new PowerMac 7600, and I am ready to install
Max 3.5 nearly a year after I bought it. I have the 3.5 CD, dated December
16th 1996, and the 3.5 key floppy disk. My old 2.5.2 key disk still has two
installs left. I intend to continue using 2.5.2 on the old Mac. My new 7600
is running OS 7.6.1.
1. What is the latest downloadable upgrade?
2. When 3.5.9 became available, David Z. told us first to update to 3.5.8,
then update to 3.5.9. Should I first install Max from my 3.5 CD, then
download 3.5.8, then 3.5.9 (or whatever is the latest)?
3. What is the latest OMS version? 2.3.3?

Thanks for any advice,

Eirik Lie, Bjornerabben 9, N-0383 Oslo, Norway
Email: eirikli@notam.uio.no   -   Tel +47 22 50 23 14
Check out my CD "12 Bilder": http://home.sol.no/home/eiriklie/Visual.html

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 14 Feb 1998 20:10:18 -0700
From:    Kevin Walker 
Subject: Re: 3.5.? update advice?

>Asking for a piece of upgrading advice:
>At last, after having struggled with Max 2.5.2 on my old IIvx for a number
>of years, I finally have got a new PowerMac 7600, and I am ready to install
>Max 3.5 nearly a year after I bought it. I have the 3.5 CD, dated December
>16th 1996, and the 3.5 key floppy disk. My old 2.5.2 key disk still has two
>installs left. I intend to continue using 2.5.2 on the old Mac. My new 7600
>is running OS 7.6.1.

I have the same Mac and same OS version, and Max 3.5.9 runs fine on it.

>1. What is the latest downloadable upgrade?

3.5.9, I believe.

>2. When 3.5.9 became available, David Z. told us first to update to 3.5.8,
>then update to 3.5.9. Should I first install Max from my 3.5 CD, then
>download 3.5.8, then 3.5.9 (or whatever is the latest)?

I think the answer is Yes.  Hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

------------------------------

End of MAX Digest - 13 Feb 1998 to 14 Feb 1998
**********************************************