don't let that troll kiss your ass

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J I believe FL is written in Python, w

FL Studio is written in Delphi.

___________________
BA-DUM-TSS

quote:

ALFI - BOHICA - DJ MIX (Stream+Dropbox)

lol. That should throw a spanner in their 64 bit works. What a joke.

___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook

Yeah it's written in Delphi. And further to Eric's post I believe that the mixer is a single thread, the gfx is, and the audio processor is. Wonder if the new features like the track lanes vs the old bar pattern structure are some things that have recently been introduced for this reason in the back-end.

___________________
Recently released:
Aesthetic - Twilight Sky [Primal-Recordings]

http://www.wtfnews.org

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips lol. That should throw a spanner in their 64 bit works. What a joke.

Good point, and thats one of the reasons I feel FL is not up to par, at least in technical terms with Logic Cubase Sonar etc. Their programming seems always to be playing catchup with the previous version of the other available DAWs. The fact that some aspects of FL are single core and while others are multicore lead me to believe it's unefficient programming at best and sloppy at worst. Then again it is way cheaper than it's competition so you do get what you pay for I suppose.

One thing I think you'll see from logic soon is a form of intelligent processor sharing - so the application manages (or at least has an option to auto manage) the spread of CPU workload base on priority and relation to your project, much as the Euphonix hardware does..

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN The fact that some aspects of FL are single core and while others are multicore lead me to believe it's unefficient programming at best and sloppy at worst.

To be fair, this can be attributed as much to design decisions as the software evolved as much as choice of language. Some of it is simply "the way it is". As I alluded to in my previous post, there are certain computing tasks that simply do not lend themselves well to parallelization, so you have to find ways around such limitations.

I really can't fault Image Line too much. Many of the applications we use today did not take into account multi-core processing when originally designed, so if design decisions were made early on that did not take this into account, then it can be more difficult to make the changes required to support parallelization.

Personally, I think one of the biggest reasons that FL is lagging behind in this area is they simply do not have the resources that say an Apple or Steinberg has. You can make major changes to your software a lot faster if you throw more money and people at the problem. Image Line most likely has fewer available developers than these other companies.

It says on imagelines website that all vsts and fx are now multicore in version 9.
I was also told if you do a direct A/B comparison to any other host in terms of cpu usage that there is no difference at all.

Although I'm sure its just a sales pitch they use. Either way they've done A LOT in this recent upgrade and unless you know anything about computer programming your in no real position to be commenting on how "sloppy" it is (DJ Rann).
In terms of "getting what you pay for", lifetime free updates and being pretty damn close to other sequencers as it is for half price sounds like a steal to me.

edit: Eric got in before me thanks for clearing that up.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox Although I'm sure its just a sales pitch they use. Either way they've done A LOT in this recent upgrade and unless you know anything about computer programming your in no real position to be commenting on how "sloppy" it is (DJ Rann). In terms of "getting what you pay for", lifetime free updates and being pretty damn close to other sequencers as it is for half price sounds like a steal to me. edit: Eric got in before me thanks for clearing that up.

Well seeing as I started programming my own games from age 8 I think I may have some experience (more years than you've been alive I think), although clearly nowhere near as much knowledge as Eric.

I personally think that any piece of software that has undergone many version updates, especially through several periods of major fundamental hardware developments, without a major re-write isn't what I would call particularly efficient so I stand by my assessment, which again, even in the first place I took in to account the economic factor ("you get what you pay for"). I can't actually think of any of the other major Daws that are still on the same initial platform it started out on.

So yes, the pay off is free lifetime updates, so it is good value, but non the less slightly hindered IMO compared to the likes of Logic Cubase Sonar etc,

You count age 8 as experience? That must look good on your resume.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox You count age 8 as experience? That must look good on your resume.

When are you going to learn.