XP Vs. Vista and Mac OS

JeffMJeffM Registered User
There are many lighting designer/programmers that are not interested in going to the new Vista OS. It is obvious that before too long just as Hog II is no longer supported or updated further, XP OS will soon find the same fate leaving us to yet again suffer with another unstable microsoft OS.
Mac OS has proven to be the most stable and less problematic of any OS software out there.

Do you have any reason not to make the Hog OS work with Mac OS without having to run XP on a Mac?
I think it would be worth looking at. Many are going to the new Mac computers as the OS is reliable and more efficient.

Comments

  • bradpepebradpepe Registered User, HES Alumni
    edited January 2008
    Hi Jeff,

    We are currently working on support for Hog 3PC on Windows Vista. As for Mac OS, there is no current timeline for implementation of such. Currently running XP on a Mac works for most customers.
  • rosswillrosswill Registered User, Hog Beta
    edited January 2008
    Personally I find Vista the single most frustrating piece of software I own. It frequently hangs and I get the Vista hourglass for no apparent reason. Outlook and IE run very slowly when compared with my XP machine which has half the hardware capabilities, and go into the “not responding” mode at least once a session.

    At worst I would be very worried about running a show under such conditions and at best in no rush.
    I use my Mac as a wireless remote all the time with Bootcamp and have also had no issues with Parallels.

    Ross
  • PimmerPacKPimmerPacK Registered User
    edited January 2008
    I bought a new system from Alienware last october, and they advised me to install XP. So I did, and no regrets with that as I hear many people around me with Vista-problems.

    Gr.
    Pim
  • MoonchildMoonchild Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Hog 3 is written in C++/Qt3 right? I develop open source apps in Qt4, and have very little problems porting them to both Windows and OSX (I am on Linux usually).

    I don't see why it would be that hard to do a OSX version assuming you are not using to much Windows API stuff, maybe we can get a Linux version one day after that?
  • Marty PostmaMarty Postma Registered User
    edited January 2008
    JeffM wrote:
    There are many lighting designer/programmers that are not interested in going to the new Vista OS. It is obvious that before too long just as Hog II is no longer supported or updated further, XP OS will soon find the same fate leaving us to yet again suffer with another unstable microsoft OS.
    Mac OS has proven to be the most stable and less problematic of any OS software out there.

    I agree that Vista is a bad choice, this is why almost every PC manufacturer is still offering XP if you ask for it when you buy a new machine. XP won't be going anywhere anytime soon not only b/c of the compatibility issues with XP software programs, but Vista is a resource MONSTER and eats up tons just sitting idle.

    Mac OS isn't perfect either....Tiger was great, but Leopard is very broken right now, and Apple has never been interesting in offering backwards compatibility. You cannot even buy a new machine with Tiger on it even if you ask for it...they force you to have Leopard. (Believe me this is driving CATALYST programmers and users absolutely crazy right now).

    I don't want to turn this into a Mac vs PC war :nono: , b/c they both have their merits....you will simply have to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of both and make a decision based on your application needs.

    Hope this helps.:)
    PimmerPacK wrote:
    I bought a new system from Alienware last october, and they advised me to install XP. So I did, and no regrets with that as I hear many people around me with Vista-problems.

    I have been using ALIENWARE for many years now as well...best mobile PC machines made for power users....hands down.
  • Mike RedmerMike Redmer Registered User
    edited January 2008
    ...Mac OS isn't perfect either....Tiger was great,...

    after some month, isn't it the same with each new software from each company?

    ...but Leopard is very broken right now...

    not real, i use leopard in many different shows and hardware setups in the last 2 month, but you can use them only if you have hardware, where exists leopard updates

    ...(Believe me this is driving CATALYST programmers and users absolutely crazy right now)...

    i haven't any trouble in the last two month with catalyst and leopard. i use leopard while quartz have a lot of new stuff in it. the main thing with catalyst - is software only and so you have to learn and understand osx and your hardware. fe you can run 4k movies but not with each hardware, and runs also in leopard. of course they have performance problems, but hopefully it's just a question of the next month. it is a big step to 64 bit.

    at last hopefully hog software is also coming soon on mac osx. some manufacturer did it in the last time. i changed to osx six years ago, and actually i never miss my windows time!
  • Woodj32177Woodj32177 Registered User
    edited January 2008
    I would have to agree,
    I switched to OSX a year or so ago, And I have found I greatly prefer working on Macs.

    As for the alienware laptops, they do make great laptops,
    but according to PC World magazine the second fastest laptop running Vista was a Macbook Pro.
    (First place is taken by a Eurocom D900C Phantom-X which retails for just over 5000$)
    So that being said, even if I had to buy a Computer just for Windows, I probably would still buy a Mac. (Unless I was trying to get a budget computer)

    That being said, the last thing on earth I want on my Mac is Windows..
    I like having the option, but would hate to sacrifice the hard drive space to a second partition just to run one app.
    Thus, I would greatly like the option of having Hog 3 on my Mac...

    I do agree Leopard has some issues,
    It does not run catalyst as well as Tiger did, but hopefully that will be figured out in the next month or so.
    But luckily, you can install tiger on new machines, you just can't buy it with it.

    Of course I do respect everyone elses opinion, but thought I would share mine.

    Joshua Wood
  • Mike RedmerMike Redmer Registered User
    edited January 2008
    ;) and do not forgot steve jobs the osx standard version cost 129$, premium version cost 129$, ultimate version cost 129$

    to have hog os on mac is not only a question of a separate partition for only one software and the to expensive operating system. in the last two years many technicians, operators and designers changed to macbook pro's. it is uninteresting how much windows licenses we have worldwide, not all of the windows users works in our business.

    you absolutely right joshua...Of course I do respect everyone elses opinion, but thought I would share mine...
  • MoonchildMoonchild Registered User
    edited January 2008
    I use HogPC under WMWare on Linux. Works great. I already had VMware Workstation installed with WindowsXP as I need to use AutoCAD. Its the easiest solution, and I belive something similar is available on the Mac.
  • stephlightstephlight Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Hi,
    Is there any chance that Hog Pc run under windows server 2003, or Xp x64, or Vista x64, because i have 4Go of Ram and x32 Os don't like too many ideas:D.
    Thanks
  • Lighting GuyLighting Guy Registered User
    edited January 2008
    From the Hog3PC download page:

    Hog 3PC requires Windows XP Home or Professional with Service Pack 2, 256 MB RAM, and 200 MB Hard-disk space.
  • Marty PostmaMarty Postma Registered User
    edited January 2008
    i use leopard in many different shows and hardware setups in the last 2 month, but you can use them only if you have hardware, where exists leopard updates

    ...(Believe me this is driving CATALYST programmers and users absolutely crazy right now)...

    i haven't any trouble in the last two month with catalyst and leopard. i use leopard while quartz have a lot of new stuff in it. the main thing with catalyst - is software only and so you have to learn and understand osx and your hardware. fe you can run 4k movies but not with each hardware, and runs also in leopard. of course they have performance problems, but hopefully it's just a question of the next month. it is a big step to 64 bit.

    Here is a link one of several threads in the CATALYST forums on some of the troubles Leopard is posing right now:

    http://chaldee1.gotadsl.co.uk/~richardb/upload/showthread.php?t=1324

    The X1900XT RADEON cards overheat, and the software performs very poorly right now.

    Make no mistake here...Leopard is is MUCH MUCH better shape than Vista, and probably will have the bugs worked out faster. It is the fact that there is not even an option to aquire Tiger when buying a new machine is what really annoys me!!

    Even programs like Vectorworks are affected...if you don't have the latest version, it won't run on Leopard.

    I use both Mac and PC....each is suited for tasks better than the other...there is no "cookie cutter" solution here.

    If the perfect computer existed, then everyone would buy that and there would be no others...and life would be rather dull;)
  • stephlightstephlight Registered User
    edited January 2008
    From the Hog3PC download page:

    Hog 3PC requires Windows XP Home or Professional with Service Pack 2, 256 MB RAM, and 200 MB Hard-disk space.

    I know that but i just finish the worksatation for wysiwyg, and i have XP pro SP2 and 4Go of Ram but this version of Xp had don't want of my 4 Go. There's two Windows XP versions, x32 et x64, and soon it will be compatible with Vista that also existe in X32 and X64.
  • quinnquinn Registered User
    edited January 2008
    stephlight wrote:
    Hi,
    Is there any chance that Hog Pc run under windows server 2003
    absolutely. prior to Vista, Server 2003 was the only OS i would use for both 2PC and 3PC.

    this thread has some instructions. they're not the best instructions, in fact they describe doing things in a very incorrect way, but it will get you where you need to be.
  • stephlightstephlight Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Thanks for your help, Wysiwyg is runing under Xp x64 so i will test it, if i have trouble, i will use hog 3, and Hog 3 Pc via a Laptop.
  • rosswillrosswill Registered User, Hog Beta
    edited January 2008
    A little off topic but to concur with Marty:

    In my own tests I have found Catalyst runs with much greater performance on Tiger, ie more layers of playback. With my system I get 10-11 layers of photo jpeg. On leopard I can get nowhere near this many.

    Carbon Copy Cloner http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html is a great way to downgrade your new leopard machines. Its shareware also so is inexpensive.

    Ross
  • VeldaVelda Registered User
    edited January 2008
    I too dream of a day when all my consoles will run under OSX. It seems so counter intuitive that i must "design" lighting in Windows.

    Ive been running leopard for a while now and while it still has a hiccup here and there it is almost entirely due to the fact that it is still new and not everyone has prepared for it yet. This goes doubly so for vista, which on its own isnt too horrible, but still gets a really bad rap right now primarily because independent developers were not ready for its release.

    As for running consoles on a mac, I have used Hog III, II, and gMA PC using both Parallels and VMware Fusion with great success. However, for any show critical use I always reboot in to the actual bootcamp install of XP that is ultra clean and pristine. Just remember that it still windows and susceptible to viruses. Its a good idea to disable any internet connection and only load on your console software and show files through the OSX share. As for hard drive space, my XP slice is only 5 Gigs. If you make a custom XP installer you can get it down really small after removing such MS staples as Solitaire, MSN Chat, and Outlook Express.
  • JeffMJeffM Registered User
    edited February 2008
    Just to recap,

    I have great success with XP with Hog PC. I have a little shuttle PC running 3 monitors, 2 playback wings, program wings, and super widget.
    One thing I don't do with the PC is connect to anything else. NO internet, NO networking other than to DL2's. This eliminates viruses and minimizes problems. I also run the system on my laptop with XP and with this PC, I get online and network while running Hog PC. I play games, surf the net and run the lighting program all at the same time with no problems.
    Here is the issue we all will be facing soon. XP will see the same fate as WIN 95/98/2000/millenium.
    If Vista is already problematic, then why migrate there? Recent history shows that MAC OS is more stable and efficient. If the future includes Catalyst, Axon, Digital lighting, real time virtual programming, and level upon level of DMX universes; shouldn't we be very concerned about the platform on which all of this equipment will be controlled from?
    XP is on it's way out. It's only a matter of time until it will no longer be supported, or upgraded. All software manufacturers will be forced to jump on the Microsoft bandwagon with whatever the latest OS is.

    I saw the writing on the wall when HOG PC was introduced. I knew Hog 2 was on the way out and all equipment along with it. Digital lighting. media servers and newer technology continues to shape our industry. Are we going to keep creating newer technology without thinking about the platform it operates on. What will we all do when XP does stop. DL2's are windows XP imbedded as is the Road Hog, and IPC.

    As lighting designers and programmers, this is our means making a living. I update to new computers every 3 years to keep up with current technology. It's that time again and I need to know where all this is going.
    I really don't want to continue with PC because it's just getting worse. MAC is getting better and better.
    And the comment was made about Allien computers. It's not the hardware as much as it is the OS. Most PC's are ok. Mine are all DELL. it's the OS that is going to discontinue at some point.
  • SBlairSBlair Registered User, HES Alumni
    edited February 2008
    Are we going to keep creating newer technology without thinking about the platform it operates on. What will we all do when XP does stop. DL2's are windows XP imbedded as is the Road Hog, and IPC.

    To set the record straight here, regardless of which direction XP Pro goes, it will not affect XP Embedded. XP Embedded is on a completely different roadmap and lifecycle from it's desktop cousin.

    From my own perspective, Apple does a much worse job of backwards compatability than MS. For the most part applications than ran under WinXP run fine under Vista. Not all, but the vast majority do. With Mac OS it seems that every time they do an upgrade it breaks every existing application on the market besides their own.

    Just my $0.02.
  • quinnquinn Registered User
    edited February 2008
    JeffM wrote:
    If the future includes Catalyst, Axon, Digital lighting, real time virtual programming, and level upon level of DMX universes; shouldn't we be very concerned about the platform on which all of this equipment will be controlled from?

    the System Information Packet. very few people actually know you don't have to begin life with a null start code.

    my reasoning suggests that this is due to the cost of implementation being deemed unjustifiable by device manufacturers.

    instead, SIP's are in general exclusive to highly specialized diagnostic tools.

    i conclude that the factor most influential to a return on including SIP generation/processing capabilities is the specification of a microcontroller or that of a microprocessor.

    for years and years and years, your typical DMX recieving devices were spec'd to microcontroller. most DMX receiving devices perform exactly the same operations: read some dip switches to get your address, listen to the DMX, and make a motor move.

    now, that process sounds quite simple. realizing such a set of microcontroller instructions however, involves some very very very, very very complicated work.
    given the example: a moving light has a 9-way dip switch for address, and a 9-way dip switch for fixture options, but its microcontroller only has 4 "input" pins, and one of these input pins is dedicated to the EIA-485 receiver’s logic high output for the purpose of "reading DMX".
    so how do you use only three pins to determine whether 18 separate circuits are open or closed?

    a common use of the term "Multiplexing" refers to the method used to read or "poll" dip switch settings.

    as we're focused on software, i'll leave the electrical engineering part pretty much ambiguous, except to say one method is to basically 6-fer your 18 circuits into 3 pins, much like how one would 6-fer RGB cyc cells.
    drop in a bunch of NAND gates so that only one RGB unit is receiving power at any given time.

    send power to the first three, read the resulting values from the output side of the switch, move these values into a register, remove power from the first three.

    send power to the next three, read the resulting values from the output side of the switch, bit shift and AND these values to the current register, remove power from these three.

    repeat until you've got the 18 values you need.
    when you change a fixture's address, you expect it to respond accordingly, right?

    for that to happen, that means we need to be checking the address often, which involves repeating that entire process over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

    now, if we want to spend our whole life reading our address, that's great, but eventually we're going to have to make time to "read DMX", and maybe even move some motors, too.

    just getting an address read into memory is complicated.

    reading, parsing, and responding to DMX takes several thousand times the amount of iterations. all of which get their go's from some piece of crystal bouncing around inside a tube. throw into the mess the fact that the 3 input pins also need to spend some of their time monitoring what the motors have done, and your head starts really hurting.



    microcontroller programming is intensive. it takes tons of work to get it right, especially when the notion of time is involved, as is the case with decoding DMX.

    to further complicate, microcontroller programming is not performed by coding in modern high level languages. it's usually done is a variation of Assembly, specific to the make/model of the microprocessor. (read: if you change chips, you have to throw away most of your code and start over). there are of course some Hi-Tech tools that can make coding easier, even to the point of extending ANSI C, but even the code used in the tools is relegated to only being useful when deployed to one single family of microcontroller. (read: just because you spent a month writing code for the microcontroller doesn't necessarily mean you have a single line of code that can be compiled into a different kind of controller, let alone into an actual desktop application)

    bust open a bunch of different fixture models from the same manufacturer's era, and you'll most likely find the exact same microcontroller in every one, illustrating the point that being able to re-use already-existent code is so crucial to business success, that manufacturers will still spec the same microcontroller that they already own code for, even if it's NRND or discontinued.

    so, given the enormous amount of work required to interpret a NSC DMX packet, it's very easy to decide that adding the capacity to additionally interpret a SIP DMX packet to a simple microcontroller-controlled fixture is a financially unsound idea.


    as i see it, ACN is what's going to give a swift kick into specing microprocessors.


    and guess who's here, ready and waiting.

    the Microsoft .NET Micro Framework

    it's a quiet revolution. the 9 to 5ers will never even notice. but i expect the "upper third" is paying very close attention.

    there's something magic about spending a week describing to the .NET Framework how your world works. it's so elegant that several institutions here in Silicon Valley have honored it as an art form, to the point of offering MFA programs in exactly that. (functional programming is design, IL emission is science, it's that simple.)

    the .NET Compact Framework (which runs on Windows CE, in addition to Windows Mobile) revolutionized the embedded device market (not to be confused with the Windows Embedded market, that runs the full framework...). think cash registers, machine control panels, home automation, routers, tv set-top boxes, mobile phones, xbox/dreamcast, etc...

    and now the .NET Micro Framework. replacing every 8051, every PIC, every motorola & ti, with (usually) an ARM7 or an ARM9.

    but the best part is how all three editions of the framework work together.
    as long as your business logic is properly separated from UI/IO, every line of logic you write for the desktop can be compiled for the Compact or Micro Framework, without making a single change, ever. conversely, if you start by targeting the Micro Framework, every line can compile to the full or Compact Framework, again, without any changes.

    this massive realization of code re-use has implications far, far beyond the scope of this little thread; there are even more important benefits to having a common runtime present on every kind of device.

    in other words, if you describe a NSC DMX packet to your desktop application, you don't need to again describe it to your fixture; it will already know. if you decide to change microprocessors, it will still know. if you later decide to make a PocketPC RFU, it too will know.

    if you decide to implement SIP, that's all too easy. everyone already knows that NSC is a kind of DMX packet, since SIP is just another kind of DMX packet, all you have to do is describe SIP once, and everyone will be able to handle it.


    put that all together and consider ACN's DDL.


    DDL uses XML. XML is essential to all the .NET Frameworks.

    not having to re-invent an XML parser/serializer in Assembly is probably by itself enough of a reason to choose the .NET Micro Framework as your new platform. the fact that you can create your DDL interpreter exactly once means that your hardware guys can spend their time in the ratsnest instead of spending years on this XML thing that has nothing to do with their motors, just to spit out a freakin UUID which, again, has nothing to do with their motors.

    having a DDL interpreter to re-use allows the mobile team to build that sexy little interface for your RFU while the desktop team works on the 3D visualizer, instead of everybody re-doing all the freaking work at every single step on every single platform.

    and the DDL's just one example. the same applies to your control. we've clearly learned that lighting is getting more compute-dense, requiring distributed processing schemes. in addition to being less work, having the controller (4PC?) and controlee (DP8000) share their definitions of control signals always results in fewer stupid mistakes / hard to find bugs! with ACN allowing manufacturer-specific uses over the line, you'd better believe things like media center preview / stock browsers are going to become super common. i'd love to see the industry pull together as a whole and agree on a way to make use of the .NET Plugin architecture to enable this kind of experience; it's the perfect way to produce results without sharing source code, just a well-documented IInterface, usable in every language.


    the future's getting complex, fast. the only way we're going to keep up is if we get every one of these instruments on the same page. ACN is why, .NET is in my opinion how.


    the information required to get .NET running on an Apple product has been available freely to Apple Corporation (actually to anyone) for many years. Cocoa isn't even available on their own mobile offering; not having an embedded (micro) offering means any lighting solution involving a mac is at minimum 2x the amount of code. it's strictly business, buddy.

    SBlair wrote:
    Apple does a much worse job of backwards compatibility than MS. For the most part applications than ran under WinXP run fine under Vista.
    i just want to emphasize this. the Application Compatibility Layer is one of THE most underappreciated parts of the system. its capacity to intercept and re-route calls is phenomenal.
  • J CriminsJ Crimins Registered User
    edited February 2008
    Quinn,
    Could you rephrase that?
    Only kidding. Wonderful post. After reading it, I feel like I earned some school credits.
    Thanks,
    -jc
  • Dan ValcichDan Valcich Registered User
    edited March 2008
    rosswill wrote:
    A little off topic but to concur with Marty:

    In my own tests I have found Catalyst runs with much greater performance on Tiger, ie more layers of playback. With my system I get 10-11 layers of photo jpeg. On leopard I can get nowhere near this many.

    Carbon Copy Cloner http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html is a great way to downgrade your new leopard machines. Its shareware also so is inexpensive.

    Ross

    Did you run into any driver issues with the graphics card or other hardware?
  • rosswillrosswill Registered User, Hog Beta
    edited March 2008
    No but you need to be careful here for sure. This will change as each machine gets further away from the Tiger ones. Latest graphics drivers are always easilly available to download however I have found.

    Ross
Sign In or Register to comment.