>> Any news on OSX version of SoundDiver? >Please understand that I can't comment on future products. Ah well, worth a try... It was an outside shot, I thought maybe you had too many flu tablets and weren't thinking straight. JR

>>> Any news on OSX version of SoundDiver? >> Please understand that I can't comment on future products. > > Ah well, worth a try... > It was an outside shot, I thought maybe you had too many flu tablets > and > weren't thinking straight. I, though not being affiliated with eMagic in any way or being a beta tester or whatnot can confirm that I have saw a (very early) working version of Sound Diver on OS X. I think that the eMagic person demoing it called it a "beta", but I'd be surprised if developers weren't calling it alpha at that point as this was a few months ago. I heard fairly recently (I thought it was here, but maybe it was in Sound on Sound or something) that eMagic would be releasing Sound Diver as a "unsupported public beta" to whoever wanted it. The gist was they wanted to make use of what they had, but didn't want to go through the trouble of keeping it up to date with every piece of hardware in existence. Anyone remember this thread? There was also talk on it of starting up some sort of grass roots open source project to keep the OS X version of SoundDiver up-to-date without eMagic's help. Was I imagining it? At any rate, given all of that info, I'm not really sure what the big mystery is about it. It seems to me as though we've been given all the information that exists short of an exact date when we can start downloading it or whatever. Cheers, -Josh Emmons

Joshua Scott Emmons wrote: >At any rate, given all of that info, I'm not really sure what the big >mystery is about it. It seems to me as though we've been given all the >information that exists short of an exact date when we can start >downloading it or whatever. > > Yes but you have to remember, being owned by Apple now, theyre not allowed legally to announce anything unless its 30 days from actual release. Think that was the right time anyways.. Chris -- http://www.descentrecords.com http://www.towelhead.net http://www.mp3.com/stemcellvirus

Josh Emmons wrote: >I, though not being affiliated with eMagic in any way or being a beta >tester or whatnot can confirm that I have saw a (very early) working >version of Sound Diver on OS X. I think that the eMagic person demoing >it called it a "beta", but I'd be surprised if developers weren't >calling it alpha at that point as this was a few months ago. > >I heard fairly recently (I thought it was here, but maybe it was in >Sound on Sound or something) that eMagic would be releasing Sound Diver >as a "unsupported public beta" to whoever wanted it. The gist was they >wanted to make use of what they had, but didn't want to go through the >trouble of keeping it up to date with every piece of hardware in >existence. Anyone remember this thread? There was also talk on it of >starting up some sort of grass roots open source project to keep the OS >X version of SoundDiver up-to-date without eMagic's help. Was I >imagining it? > >At any rate, given all of that info, I'm not really sure what the big >mystery is about it. It seems to me as though we've been given all the >information that exists short of an exact date when we can start >downloading it or whatever. Thanks for that interesting real-life data Josh. The real problem is that many folks have been wanting to make the change to OSX for a long time and have been held up by SoundDiver as well as several plugins and VSTi's. Now that many or most plugins are AU's, the big holdup lies with SoundDiver. I wish they'd give us the beta to try out. Many users on the SD forum have offered to betatest OSX adaptions, so I can't imagine why they're being so tight-fisted about it. Regards - Colin

Colin Shapiro wrote: > The real problem is that many folks have been wanting to make the > change to OSX for a long time and have been held up by SoundDiver as > well as several plugins and VSTi's. > ... > I wish they'd give us the beta to try out. Many users on the SD forum > have offered to betatest OSX adaptions, so I can't imagine why > they're being so tight-fisted about it. I sympathize with those that are waiting for SD to switch to OS X. But I think most of the delay is associated with the kind of red-tape that goes along with any sort of acquisition -- esp. one where Apple is involved. Apple is one of the few computer companies with rock solid branding and vision. Upon purchasing eMagic, I'm sure all the apple execs had to gather around and figure out just where eMagic's products would fit into Apple's strategy. Some were easy, like Logic itself and it's offshoot Soundtrack. Others, like the EMI and Logic Control stuff, appear to have been dropped or farmed out to other companies to manage. SD is a tough fit. It a niche product in a niche market that costs many man-hours to keep current and usable. I can see why Apple would be having second thoughts about supporting it as a full-fledged product. The problem is until Apple figures out if SD's a definite go or no-go, they can't let it out to the public lest they decide to support it (or not support it) in the future. Any "sort-of, kind-of" release would dilute and weaken the Apple brand. But if there is one thing Apple is more committed to than strengthening its brand, it's getting users off OS9 and on to OS X. If there are many SD users who are waiting on an OS X version of SD to make the jump, I would suggest telling Apple so. Don't just complain in SD and Logic lists, complain in one of Apple's forums. Make it clear that SD is the one thing keeping you in 9 and you would eagerly upgrade to X if it was available. That's talking the kind of language that Apple can understand. There's a form on their OS X Download page for submitting feedback and requests: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/feedback/ Cheers, -Josh Emmons

>> At any rate, given all of that info, I'm not really sure what the big >> mystery is about it. It seems to me as though we've been given all >> the >> information that exists short of an exact date when we can start >> downloading it or whatever. > Yes but you have to remember, being owned by Apple now, theyre not > allowed legally to announce anything unless its 30 days from actual > release. That's kind of my point. I'm saying that everyone should accept that eMagic and Apple's hands are tied as far as giving a definitive release date (or lack thereof), but realize that this does not leave us in the dark. Considering Apple's policy on such things, I think they've been keeping us pretty well informed. Cheers, -Josh Emmons

>But if there is one thing Apple is more committed to than strengthening >its brand, it's getting users off OS9 and on to OS X. If there are >many SD users who are waiting on an OS X version of SD to make the >jump, I would suggest telling Apple so. Don't just complain in SD and >Logic lists, complain in one of Apple's forums. Make it clear that SD >is the one thing keeping you in 9 and you would eagerly upgrade to X if >it was available. That's talking the kind of language that Apple can >understand. > >There's a form on their OS X Download page for submitting feedback and >requests: >http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/feedback/ Nice idea, but this page says: > Use this form to give us your feedback or report any problems you >experienced finding information on Mac OS X Downloads. Please note >that we cannot respond to general questions and/or information >requests submitted through our Feedback site. This form will not >help you receive customer support. So I don't think this is the place to submit as you suggest. Any other ideas or URL's? I'm dying to start bombarding Apple with complaints about the lack of an OSX version of SD. Regards - COLIN

>> Use this form to give us your feedback or report any problems you >> experienced finding information on Mac OS X Downloads. Please note >> that we cannot respond to general questions and/or information >> requests submitted through our Feedback site. This form will not >> help you receive customer support. > > So I don't think this is the place to submit as you suggest. It says the form is for feedback and problem reports. I'd say reporting your unwillingness to switch to X without SD definitely counts as "feedback". True, they say they cannot send you replies in response to questions/requests or give you technical support, but that's not really what you're looking for, is it? Cheers, -Josh Emmons

>It says the form is for feedback and problem reports. I'd say >reporting your unwillingness to switch to X without SD definitely >counts as "feedback". True, they say they cannot send you replies in >response to questions/requests or give you technical support, but >that's not really what you're looking for, is it? Okay, point taken. I've posted my problems using that form (http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/feedback/) and requested that my mail be forwarded to the relevant parties. I recommend other users to do the same. Regards - Colin

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Scott Emmons wrote: > ... > I heard fairly recently (I thought it was here, but maybe > it was in Sound on Sound or something) that eMagic would > be releasing Sound Diver as a "unsupported public beta" > to whoever wanted it. The gist was they wanted to make > use of what they had, but didn't want to go through the > trouble of keeping it up to date with every piece of > hardware in existence. Anyone remember this thread? > There was also talk on it of starting up some sort of grass > roots open source project to keep the OSX version of > SoundDiver up-to-date without eMagic's help. Was I > imagining it? > ... If they really have it ported to OSX, then yes, I think it might make a lot of sense to make it part of the OSX 10.3 release, as an unsupported OSX-specific freebie. That way they get another newsworthy thing to trumpet about when 10.3 is released, along the lines of OSX 10.3 being more multimedia- friendly straight out of the box than other operating systems (presumably 10.3 will also have all the mLAN wrinkles sorted out, and they will be able to show off about that too), and they'll be able to say to all the hardware manufacturers: "if you put together an SD configuration for your hardware, you can put that on your driver CD and tell all your customers that they get a free OSX editor/librarian with every unit". I think there must be a few hardware manufacturers seriously pissed off with emagic after the takever because they had made a strategic commitment to using SD for editor/librarian support for their products. I know Line6 used to bundle SD with some of their products, and now they've dropped it and written their own editor/librarian stuff. Making SD a standard option under OSX 10.3 and including it on the 10.3 CDR (if only an "unsupported" accessory) would go some way to saving face, and might also help shift a few units when 10.3 comes out. It would be a much tougher job to sell it as a stand-alone OSX-only product, I think. The spread of softsynths has probably taken a lot of the "oomph" out of the market for a universal ed/libs, so relaunching SD as a "new" OSX product might be difficult. Easier to give it away, unsupported, and make your money from people buying OSX upgrades. [Erk]

>.....I think it might make >a lot of sense to make it part of the OSX 10.3 release, as an >unsupported OSX-specific freebie. > >That way they get another newsworthy thing to trumpet about when 10.3 >is released, along the lines of OSX 10.3 being more multimedia- >friendly straight out of the box than other operating systems >(presumably 10.3 will also have all the mLAN wrinkles sorted out, and >they will be able to show off about that too), and they'll be able to >say to all the hardware manufacturers: "if you put together an SD >configuration for your hardware, you can put that on your driver CD >and tell all your customers that they get a free OSX editor/librarian >with every unit". I doubt this will happen, as the kind of user that requires dedicated music hardware editors is a microscopically small niche market, compared to folks who want iMovie and iDVD for example. Don't hold your breath..... Regards - Colin