Not sure how much you really gain by putting a looot of effort into tweaking everything... I wonder how many users are using SSL with an "outdated" computer.

Good luck in finding a 1GHz PC these days ;)

That's why I'm asking, I don't know either. If I knew that I wouldn't need to ask.

en.wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org/automix

LOL @ this thread.

You really think Matt G & crew are gonna come in here, read this thread, and say "Holy crap, he's right! Hey guys, maybe we have some old lines of code in there that we can take out!"

The questions you're asking are the questions that the development manager asks, not some peon on the support forum.

Yes, I'm being a prick.

Yes, your questions were dumb.

No. Read my post prick. I'm asking if this software really needs to higher systems requirements than my entire operating system.

Here's an easy solution:

If serato ever gets to the point where you have to upgrade your system, don't upgrade it. When newer and better are features are added, yes you will have to upgrade your system.

Picture this scenario: You've been using the same computer with Windows 3.11 for YEARS (i'm talking 10+). All of a sudden, you realize that you want to use Vista, with all the new features, but your old computer can't support the minimum specs of Vista. You have two options here: Buy a new computer or stick with the old software. Both 3.11 and Vista are Windows OS, but one has more features than the other thus requiring more space, RAM, and processing power.

Basically you're asking for the impossible; whenever new features are added, it will raise the specs. Although I think pong will run on your system forever.


And make it more efficient so more customers can run the software? They can use an older version if they have to, but I don't think serato's market is the One Laptop Per Child users (www.nytimes.com)


So in short, software is always evolving and the hardware must be upgraded eventually to keep up.

whoops...meant to say "When newer and better are features are added THAT YOU WANT BUT YOUR SYSTEM CAN'T HANDLE, yes you will have to upgrade your system."

It's actually a big game they're playing. They make the system requirements super high so everybody gets pissed off and has to buy new computers.

Come on man, use your brain.

Right. I'm well aware that if I want more features upgrades may be necessary as indicated in my original post when I stated that:

I am concerned that in the future I might have to upgrade my machine to stay current if the minimum requirements keep going up.

I'm not asking for anything "impossible". I just wanted to know if this was a priority for SL, which I suppose it isn't since I haven't heard anything from anyone who would actually know something about the code (or maybe they're too busy - off optimizing code, who knows).

Use your brain prick, think to yourself,"Do I know anything at all about this topic of which I am about to speak?", then reply to yourself,"no, i do not" and then you can go back to answering calls dj cubicle because I'm sure you haven't met your quota for this hour.

Honestly, how much optimizing do you think can be done? When you add in autolooping, MIDI, etc, the code will get substantially larger. You don't have to use the most recent version if your computer won't support it. And I'd much rather have the SSL team CODE and continue to improve SSL than come in here to comment on how optimizing code is a lengthy, time consuming process that in the long run is a waste of time.

Besides, it's been less than 24 hours since your original post. Stop being a greedy, impatient microwave. If they answer, they answer. If they don't, don't throw a bitch fit. You should be concerned about becoming a better DJ rather than making sure the program's optimized for the future.

As an owner of a lesser computer, you ARE FULLY ENTITLED to have less items checked in your setup, and save a few CPU cycles, or simply CHOOSE not upgrade to a newer version.


That being said, it'd be rare for a software company to ADD more code/features, and have it NOT burn up more CPU, regardless of efficiency of the code. If you can name one that has traveled upstream, please feel free.

Thanks Eder. I'm sure they only check thread messages when they need a good laugh, not when they are busy doing actual work. I'm not in any hurry for a response. I don't think that this thread is going to take any work time away from their many more important projects.

I am a little surprised at how many people who don't handle the code (or know anything at all about it first-hand) have responded in this thread.

www.djdg.la

You posted in the PUBLIC section of the forum. That means anyone can chip in. If you wanted to talk to mods/dev and ONLY mods/dev, you should have PM'd them, asshat. It's surprising that you don't think other people will chip in and tell you that your requests are pretty foolish.

LOL....who wants to be the one to tell this guy I'm a programmer?

I've actually LOOKED at how the code works and managed to unlock features before they were publicly available. (References available upon request) So, unfortunately for you, I DO know what I'm talking about.

well done eder!

cubicle what exactly do you program...VCR's or alarm clocks?

you've "looked at how the code works"...impressive!

yo cube my coffee maker is blinking 12:00 do i need to do a reboot? Do you do house calls?

hahahaha!!!

and eder, that was priceless.

Tough getting the cat back in the bag when everybody's realized you're an idiot, isn't it cappinkirk?

Feel free to ask Matt G or Nathan about the questions I had when I unlocked VSL before it had been released. Feel free to check the thread for the sampler I wrote to use with SSL. Feel free to check your ass, I think your head's in it.

...and for the record, I don't even bother programming my VCRs and alarm clocks. If they don't work I just throw 'em in the trash for the garbage man to pick up. Gotta make sure you have a job!

someone needs to make an aggregate thread for stupid comments / threads.

+1



Maybe some people here have some commons sense? ;)



Sheesh. I hate you cubicle.. for not answering my questions.



Kirk... Actually I can confirm that cubicle knows what he is doing... seriously.

dj cubicle, cappinkirk, chill out. No need for things to get nasty.

As to the original questions:



As a general rule, all computer programs can have more optimising done to them. But there's an often used rule of programming which is "don't do premature optimising". That means don't waste time optimising code that isn't getting in the way - spend time on what actually needs it. So what happens with Scratch LIVE is if some part of it feels like it's noticeably performing poorly or slowing things down generally, then it gets attention and is made to work faster.

I think if you compare Scratch LIVE's system requirements (both stated and actual) you'll probably find that it runs well on much older hardware than competing packages do. So while there's always more optimising that can (and will) be done, I think we're probably not doing too badly :)



As newer hardware comes out it'll be possible for Scratch LIVE to do more things at once on current hardware, so more features will be added. And in time that'll mean older computers can't keep up. That's just how the software world goes.

We do spend time considering that, and paying attention to how it performs on older computers. When considering minimum requirements (and making sure SSL works on them) we consider what sort of old computers are still generally usable and considered decent in general terms.

Looking at the 1GHz minimum for Macs, I'd personally actually consider that *below* what I think is a usable computer in today's software world! If I still had a G4 PowerBook as my main computer I wouldn't want it to be less than 1.5GHz for it to be a comfortable day to day computer. But Scratch LIVE would still run reasonably acceptably on the 1GHz model.

So short answer: Yes, if you want to stay current with the latest versions of Scratch LIVE, over time you will need to upgrade your computer. That's true of all software, not just Scratch LIVE. But we generally aim to make it usable on older hardware for longer than industry norms. If you have a computer that you (and people generally) still think is a decent computer, then we're probably paying attention to making sure Scratch LIVE still runs reasonably on it too.

You'll no doubt hate this answer, but the first one that comes to mind is Apple.

Every major revision of OS X from 10.0 through 10.4 improved performance when compared to the earlier versions on the same hardware. Apple actually did manage to optimize performance while at the same time adding festures.

Unfortunately the performance increases stopped with the release of Leopard, but supposedly the next major revision "Snow Leopard" will include a lot of additional optimizations for modern multi-CPU computers (while dumping support for the old PowerPC-based Macs).

True as usual Mark, but you sugar coated it too much. Yes Apple has been great about optimizing the code to support the older hardware BUT where Apple gets you is when they add features that can ONLY run/work on newer systems. Things like Quartz Extreme eye candy stuff, Video iChat, and a few other things come to mind immediately. Usually Apple's latest OS supports hardware about 3 or 4 years old, but some of the newer features require near latest and greatest.

Again to answer cappinkirk, what I would like is to have EASY ACCESS to all the OLD VERSIONS of scratch live in one nice neat area with the recommended system requirements. Those versions just don't stop working after time, they worked OK with the hardware from "that day".

Why. I sometimes hate hooking up my computer and the SSL box at home in between gigs just to practice. I have a iBook G3 that still works just sitting around collecting dust so if I could run a OLDER compatible version of SSL (1.4 maybe)on this dedicated practice mac, maybe I would do it more.

Back in the old days, I hear a song and think of a mix, run home power up my tables, dig in the crates and just do it. Now I have to hook up everything, etc...

Yep, I am lazy...

Heh. Apple are actually one of my favourite examples of this being done well :)

Although I can't agree with you on 10.4. Tiger was a massive step backwards in performance and system requirements compared to Panther (although Apple weren't honest enough to admit the requirement increases at the time, which I considered quite poor form). Dashboard and Spotlight were grotesquely inefficient and memory hoggish at initial release. Although they did improve things to a reasonable level in point releases, Tiger still requires more processor and memory than Panther. But yes, previous to 10.4, each version brought performance improvements as well as new features. Much respect to Apple there.

But also keep in mind that as Apple have added new features to OS X, their memory requirements (although not often CPU requirements) have usually gone up. Leopard needs more memory than Tiger and Tiger needs more memory than Panther.

Thanks Matt G.

Snow Leopard??? I'm kinda partial to the "Stray Cat" OS myself.

Oh yeah...this thread is funny. lol

it just doesn't matter the question, a select few of you consistently redirect. Do you guys ever get sick of swinging off Steve Jobs jock strap? ever?

It's not exactly what you're asking for, but it's close: www.scratchlive.net

That's most of the old versions available for download, with release notes. Although not with the system requirements listed. I think the system requirements haven't changed very often. Someone else at Serato would know that better than me.

There's caveats with old versions though. Things like changing database file formats, inability to play Whitelabel.net files, and perhaps various other details I'm not aware of. Again, I'm no the best to know.

Any chance there will ever be an OS-level version of SL? I know it's unlikely.

You asked a specific question, and I gave a specific answer.

Please leave Steve Jobs and his jockstrap out of it.

Thank you.

I have a few other duo core macs that I use for VSL and for graphics apps but the G4 powerbook is only used for SL. I know especially since it's powerPC it would never happen but I always wanted an SL OS.

Not sure what you mean by OS-level?

Like I turn on my computer and no apple, no windows, it's SL.

or I can pick which startup OS like boot camp

The purpose would be to dedicate 100% of system resources to Serato on a given machine.

SWWWWWWWWWIIIIIINGGGGGG....

LOL, Kagen.

They must of switched the Kool Aide when you bought your Mac, or maybe it was the bad Lot that they recalled??? That shit should have been working by now?

Mark what was the lot number of the bad magic Kool Aide that makes you think Apple is perfect everytime you use your Mac???

Obviously Kagen got hold of the bad lot of the magic kool aide.

Hmmmm, (where's that jock strap) the way the Mac OS works if I am not mistaken, the Active App gets most of the resources anyway. The way Serato takes over your whole screen by default makes it sort of what you seek.

Just close all your Finder Windows, turn off Airport & Bluetooth, Close ALL other Apps and if you want, create a new user and disable some of the other Apps that run background tasks for that User.

next time you are in SSL, minimize and launch activity monitor in your utilities folder and see how many/what resources are being used. it's not that bad and if so, the fix is cheap - more Ram.

Uhm.. multitasking works a bit more complicated ;)

I appreciate the suggestions Pumping Payne but I already disable airport, bluetooth and run only SL on that powerbook. I keep my desktop empty and I logout & log back in by holding the shift key to prevent login items from opening automatically before starting serato.

docs.info.apple.com

I also turned off all widgets & disabled the dashboard so no widget or dashboard ram is used.

Sleep & screensavers are disabled and for a while I even disabled the clock and some other stuff but I now I have the clock on again.

this question is retarded... its like "ugh i wanna play World of Warcraft but i have windows 95!!!!!!!!!1111 argh1!!!! all these updates to games makes me have to buy new hardware.... ugggghhghghghghg"


shhhhhh

no briguy, it's more like I have OSX and the latest G4 powerbook maxed out with RAM but I want to use SL and record a set without it buzzing and overloading during the recording.

I'm guessing your powerbook is about 3 or 4 years old, right? As Mac users are used to their machines standing time a litte better than pc's, I understand your concern. Still, When adapting to Intel, Apple did a huge leap. I guess you'll need to compromise: get another recording unit or upgrade to another computer. I don't have much experience with the 57, maybe another option would be to downgrade the software?

Is your laptop buzzing because it's hot? What do you mean by overloading? Is it still able to record your set?

sometimes when I load a track while recording it creates a buzz on the music/recording. i assume that it is from some type of overload of my computer.

Hmm. I'm no expert on recording, but that sounds like something worth going through with the support guys. I recommend you file a help request (www.scratchlive.net or www.serato.com) and see if the support guys have any ideas. Your computer is above minimum specs and shouldn't be having problems recording.

www.djforums.com

Those numbers are not too bad...

scratchlive.net