Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

My vote is for USB or Ethernet, preferably USB. I use a laptop so don't
have a direct serial port. Midi is very standard but inherently limited
and again I'd need an adaptor. Although Midi might enable the CG to
respond to other hardware, I think the main point here is to develop a
computer to CG interface so why not use the standard computer
jack/protocols. Ethernet is cool (put your CG under internet control!),
but I think USB makes more sense overall.

I'll volunteer to write an editor (especially if it means I get hardware
early :) ). I can do it in Java which should be able to handle any of
the interface options and theoretically do it cross platform. I use OSX
so I will make sure it covers OSX as well. I'm a programmer by trade
but am more of the make-it-work type than the make-it-look-pretty type
so would be open to a collaborator on the graphic end even if just for
photoshop work.

Dave

Paul Schreiber wrote:
>> Paul, have you made any more decision regarding the digital interface
>> to the cloud generator? With all of these parameters being able to
>> code a computer based editor would seem a big plus. I know some
>> people prefer to keep their computer and modular segregated but I'm
>> always looking for more ways to use my computer with my modular.
>
> Hmmm... I haven't really thought about it (having direct link from the
> Expander to a computer). It could be:
>
> a) serial port
> b) MIDI port
> c) USB
> d) Ethernet
>
> The added hardware cost is $10-$15 (my cost) per module, so I guess the
> question to ask is:
>
> a) who wants to volunteer to write the editors
> b) is a burden cost of say $30/module worth it (everyone pays it)
>
> This would push the planned cost of the Expander from $189 to say $219.
> Big deal?
>
> Paul S.
>