MOTM

This was just announced today.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

Anyone know if this will solve the "Windows only" update issue?



_______________________________

Receive-Transmit

Germany | USA | Australia

www.receive-transmit.com

_______________________________

I would guess that yes it would for those folks who have the new
Intel based Macs. The Mac user would have to purchase a copy of
Windows XP to be installed on the Mac platform. I assume following
that, MidiOX would work as normal.

All this is guesswork, since I do not have a Mac. Plan on one soon
though.

Andy

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Day <aaron@...> wrote:
>
> This was just announced today.
>
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
>
> Anyone know if this will solve the "Windows only" update issue?
>
>
>
> _______________________________
>
> Receive-Transmit
>
> Germany | USA | Australia
>
> www.receive-transmit.com
>
> _______________________________
>

That will be real nice for some of us who have to deal with microcontroller development but who otherwise love macs.
(Already eyeing the office iMac for upgrading.....)

Jason Proctor wrote:

yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
Windows software does normally :-)



>I would guess that yes it would for those folks who have the new
>Intel based Macs. The Mac user would have to purchase a copy of
>Windows XP to be installed on the Mac platform. I assume following
>that, MidiOX would work as normal.
>
>All this is guesswork, since I do not have a Mac. Plan on one soon
>though.
>
>Andy

-- 
Regards,
John Blacet

Blacet Research
http://www.blacet.com

yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
Windows software does normally :-)

>I would guess that yes it would for those folks who have the new
>Intel based Macs. The Mac user would have to purchase a copy of
>Windows XP to be installed on the Mac platform. I assume following
>that, MidiOX would work as normal.
>
>All this is guesswork, since I do not have a Mac. Plan on one soon
>though.
>
>Andy

exactly. now you can run all your favourite apps on the best platform
for them, on one piece of hardware.

>That will be real nice for some of us who have to deal with
>microcontroller development but who otherwise love macs.
>(Already eyeing the office iMac for upgrading.....)
>
>Jason Proctor wrote:
>
>>yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
>>of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
>>Windows software does normally :-)

I'm not so sure, guys. The trouble might be in the MIDI ports and
drivers. Time will tell...

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Jason Proctor <jason@...> wrote:
>
> yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
> of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
> Windows software does normally :-)
>
>
>
> >I would guess that yes it would for those folks who have the new
> >Intel based Macs. The Mac user would have to purchase a copy of
> >Windows XP to be installed on the Mac platform. I assume following
> >that, MidiOX would work as normal.
> >
> >All this is guesswork, since I do not have a Mac. Plan on one soon
> >though.
> >
> >Andy
>

>That will be real nice for some of us who have to deal with
>microcontroller development but who otherwise love macs.
>(Already eyeing the office iMac for upgrading.....)

That and playing all those games that don't exist for the Mac OS...

--

Terry Bowman, KA4HJH
"The Mac Doctor"

> I'm not so sure, guys. The trouble might be in the MIDI ports and
> drivers. Time will tell...

If you can load the MIDI driver on the machine, the 650 update utility
will work.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley "If you owe the bank $100, it's your problem. If you
Synthcom Systems, Inc. owe them $100mil, it's the bank's problem." - JP Getty

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, John Blacet wrote:

> That will be real nice for some of us who have to deal with microcontroller
> development but who otherwise love macs.
> (Already eyeing the office iMac for upgrading.....)

on a related note, I have a tool chain for avr-gcc that runs from inside
Xcode and compiles and flashes the device with one key command. It's
pretty easy to setup if you're interested.

Various other gcc based toolchains are also possible to integrate. All the
other stuff, ya still need windows for.

----

To add to the bootcamp fray here, that's a pretty expensive way for a mac
owner to install firmware as one still needs to buy a copy of windows, use
up at least 10gigs of disk space, and spend several hours installing XP
before they can flash the box.

I'd much rather the handshake spec was posted and someone could whip a
cocoa downloader together in an afternoon.

cheers,
--mikes

why are you not so sure? would you trust a PC with dell, hp, compaq,
$boxshifter written on the front, but not apple?

apple ship all the drivers necessary for their video card etc on the
boot camp disk. after that, it's just Windows.

>I'm not so sure, guys. The trouble might be in the MIDI ports and
>drivers. Time will tell...
>
>--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Jason Proctor <jason@...> wrote:
>>
>> yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
>> of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
> > Windows software does normally :-)
>>

Yeah, I'll have to disagree completely and say "As long as you've got a
midi interface (USB) that is supported in windows, it will work 100%
perfectly fine in Windows-XP-on-the-intel-mac."

It's really just a dual boot, it's not inside emulation or
virtualization, as the new macs *are* PCs, just with a different
firmware system instead of a standard PC bios. Oh, and they look nicer =]

Of course, this means you'll need to shell out the $250 or whatever for
your Windows XP license... yuckies! FOSS, people!

Mike Marsh wrote:

>I'm not so sure, guys. The trouble might be in the MIDI ports and
>drivers. Time will tell...
>
>--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Jason Proctor <jason@...> wrote:
>
>
>>yes. it's real Windows running on a real Intel machine. not emulation
>>of any kind. so i would expect Windows software to work as well as
>>Windows software does normally :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I would guess that yes it would for those folks who have the new
>>>Intel based Macs. The Mac user would have to purchase a copy of
>>>Windows XP to be installed on the Mac platform. I assume following
>>>that, MidiOX would work as normal.
>>>
>>>All this is guesswork, since I do not have a Mac. Plan on one soon
>>>though.
>>>
>>>Andy
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 22:39 -0700, Mike Estee wrote:

> I'd much rather the handshake spec was posted and someone could whip a
> cocoa downloader together in an afternoon.

If this protocol is published, I promise to create a Linux utility to do
updates. It should be very easy to go from that to something that will
run on a mac.

--
(jfm3)

> on a related note, I have a tool chain for avr-gcc that runs
> from inside Xcode and compiles and flashes the device with
> one key command. It's pretty easy to setup if you're interested.

I was just skimming posts at AVRfreaks.net on that very subject. Have you
had any luck with getting gdb to work? That seems to be the sticky wicket. I
do cross-platform development and hence have both Macs and PCs here, and am
perfectly content to use PCs (in fact, I prefer them), but it's a point of
curiosity.

> I'd much rather the handshake spec was posted and someone
> could whip a cocoa downloader together in an afternoon.

If this someone is available, they should contact Paul directly.
Extrapolating from a phone call I received from him, he could use such a
someone.

--Adam

--- Mike Estee <squeeker@...> wrote:

> I'd much rather the handshake spec was posted and
> someone could whip a
> cocoa downloader together in an afternoon.
>
> cheers,
> --mikes
>

Well, could we coax you to do it? After all, you're
the insider here, right?
Seriously, it would be very useful to have an OS X
650-flasher utility and it would be *very very much*
appreciated by many of us here (including myself)!!

Best Regards,
Dino


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

>> I'd much rather the handshake spec was posted and someone could whip a
>> cocoa downloader together in an afternoon.
>
> If this protocol is published, I promise to create a Linux utility to do
> updates. It should be very easy to go from that to something that will
> run on a mac.

Source code is already available to anyone who wants to do a Mac port.
I've started one, but I don't have enough experience with OSX yet to do
it. If an OSX porter wants to do a port, I'll make the code available. We
DO NOT want rogue update utilities.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley "If you owe the bank $100, it's your problem. If you
Synthcom Systems, Inc. owe them $100mil, it's the bank's problem." - JP Getty

I think the issue here is that Apple provides the drivers for its own
video, audio, NIC and such but nothing else.

If you have a stand-alone MIDI interface that connects through a PCI
card, you may well be out of luck.

You may also be out of luck if your MIDI interface connects through a
USB interface but the interface driver authors "got cute" and wrote
something that is based on WinTel hardware. There is no guarantee that
you can take a MIDI interface and plug it into the MAC and have the
accompanying drivers work.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Jason Proctor
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:59 PM
> To: MOTM
> Subject: Re: [motm] Re: MOTM-650 mac users: mac bootcamp = MS
> XP on intelmac = 650 updating from Mac
>
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325
>
> gents, it's just windows, regardless of who makes the box.
>
>
> >Of course, this means you'll need to shell out the $250 or
> whatever for
> >your Windows XP license... yuckies! FOSS, people!
> >
>
> i'm sure that if you check your spam folder you'll find people
> willing to sell you a copy for less
>
> ;-)
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325

gents, it's just windows, regardless of who makes the box.

>Of course, this means you'll need to shell out the $250 or whatever for
>your Windows XP license... yuckies! FOSS, people!
>

i'm sure that if you check your spam folder you'll find people
willing to sell you a copy for less

;-)

in the wintel world, there is a minimum required standard for
hardware compatibility. that includes keyboard & video & by now
probably usb etc. your box has to be able to boot from the windows
cdrom and install windows, with the bios providing the only
abstraction layer. otherwise you wouldn't get far enough to install
any custom drivers.

>I think the issue here is that Apple provides the drivers for its own
>video, audio, NIC and such but nothing else.

that's all it needs. what else would you have them provide?

all the other drivers are standard (across the windows version). note
there aren't different usb midi driver downloads for compaq, dell,
hp, etc. they are all the same. because the interfaces the *driver*
talks to are standard. at the top, it implements the windows midi
device api. at the bottom, it talks to the windows usb api, which in
turn is implemented by the usb driver for your motherboard. you find
your device via the usb api and then talk whatever proprietary stuff
you want (via standard usb api i/o calls) once you've found it.

>If you have a stand-alone MIDI interface that connects through a PCI
>card, you may well be out of luck.

you have to make your PCI bus available via the standard calls.
otherwise even the installer won't work.

>You may also be out of luck if your MIDI interface connects through a
>USB interface but the interface driver authors "got cute" and wrote
>something that is based on WinTel hardware.

hello? this *is* a wintel hardware box. this *is* a PC. it is *not* emulation.

the fact that it has an apple logo on the front doesn't make it *not*
a PC, any more than a powerpc chip inside makes a powermac *not* a
macintosh. it has nothing in common with any previous apple hardware.
the only potential difference between this box and a(nother) generic
wintel box is the rumoured bit of DRM in the bios necessary for
running Mac OS X.

any driver authors that got cute can expect flaky compatibility on
other manufacturers' wintel boxes too. it's not like the apple intel
box is one way and all the other wintel boxes are another way. they
are all 5% different from each other.

of course, apple might have screwed up. but if so, that's a bios bug,
not a fundamental architecture difference. and that article link i
posted seems to indicate that it works.

my last post on this topic, which is way OT for MOTM! :-)

j

disclaimer: i worked for a PC emulation company for a long time

Exactly. Plus even though USB is a 'standard' it may be open to
interpretation at the hardware/firmware level. In the PC world,
manufacturers have to make sure these devices work across any vendor's
PC. In the Mac world, Apple does what it wants.

So again, time will tell.

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Halliday" <dh@...> wrote:
>
> I think the issue here is that Apple provides the drivers for its own
> video, audio, NIC and such but nothing else.
>
> If you have a stand-alone MIDI interface that connects through a PCI
> card, you may well be out of luck.
>
> You may also be out of luck if your MIDI interface connects through a
> USB interface but the interface driver authors "got cute" and wrote
> something that is based on WinTel hardware. There is no guarantee that
> you can take a MIDI interface and plug it into the MAC and have the
> accompanying drivers work.
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On
> > Behalf Of Jason Proctor
> > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:59 PM
> > To: MOTM
> > Subject: Re: [motm] Re: MOTM-650 mac users: mac bootcamp = MS
> > XP on intelmac = 650 updating from Mac
> >
> >
> > http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325
> >
> > gents, it's just windows, regardless of who makes the box.
> >
> >
> > >Of course, this means you'll need to shell out the $250 or
> > whatever for
> > >your Windows XP license... yuckies! FOSS, people!
> > >
> >
> > i'm sure that if you check your spam folder you'll find people
> > willing to sell you a copy for less
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

No, it's an Apple Mac using an Intel prcessor (and some glue chips).
XP does not require USB to be present to install.

>
> hello? this *is* a wintel hardware box. this *is* a PC. it is *not*

emulation.

>

>No, it's an Apple Mac using an Intel prcessor (and some glue chips).

define the term "PC". PCs are just intel chips with a bios (glue
chip, as you call it) that interfaces to whatever hardware is on the
motherboard (an extremely wide range, excluding apple's design). if
the apple PC isn't a PC, then neither is anything else.

>XP does not require USB to be present to install.

i didn't say it did. i said that there was a standard for hardware
compatibility (ie bios support) which now probably includes USB. this
is absolutely necessary when your PC doesn't have serial key/mouse
ports.

and for those who point out that apple only supports the latest XP
installers blah blah, it's because apple looked forwards and
implemented the EFI stuff so that vista would work.

ok so this *really* is my last post on this issue.

Right -- the device protocols are fixed (voltages and signals) at the
__physical__ USB connector but how to get from the running application
to the physical connector are very much up for grabs and depends on the
whim of the programmer of the chipset. When you start layering multiple
streams of an antique serial protocol (MIDI) onto the USB protocols,
things can get interesting.

My MIDI interface is MidiMan MidiSport 8*8 and I had to go through one
firmware and several driver versions before I got good stable
performance on Windows 2000. I can only imagine someone trying to run
this from the MAC platform.

As Jason mentioned, it's only 5% different from a WinTel box but I have
been bitten more than once by much less than 5%.

I used to work at MSFT and was on the ship team for Windows 2000 so I
have seen my share of "interesting" drivers.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Mike Marsh
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 4:21 PM
> To: motm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [motm] Re: MOTM-650 mac users: mac bootcamp = MS XP
> on intelmac = 650 updating from Ma
>
>
>
> Exactly. Plus even though USB is a 'standard' it may be open to
> interpretation at the hardware/firmware level. In the PC world,
> manufacturers have to make sure these devices work across any vendor's
> PC. In the Mac world, Apple does what it wants.
>
> So again, time will tell.
>
> Mike
>
> --- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Halliday" <dh@...> wrote:
> >
> > I think the issue here is that Apple provides the drivers
> for its own
> > video, audio, NIC and such but nothing else.
> >
> > If you have a stand-alone MIDI interface that connects through a PCI
> > card, you may well be out of luck.
> >
> > You may also be out of luck if your MIDI interface connects
> through a
> > USB interface but the interface driver authors "got cute" and wrote
> > something that is based on WinTel hardware. There is no
> guarantee that
> > you can take a MIDI interface and plug it into the MAC and have the
> > accompanying drivers work.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On
> > > Behalf Of Jason Proctor
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:59 PM
> > > To: MOTM
> > > Subject: Re: [motm] Re: MOTM-650 mac users: mac bootcamp = MS
> > > XP on intelmac = 650 updating from Mac
> > >
> > >
> > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325
> > >
> > > gents, it's just windows, regardless of who makes the box.
> > >
> > >
> > > >Of course, this means you'll need to shell out the $250 or
> > > whatever for
> > > >your Windows XP license... yuckies! FOSS, people!
> > > >
> > >
> > > i'm sure that if you check your spam folder you'll find people
> > > willing to sell you a copy for less
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>As Jason mentioned, it's only 5% different from a WinTel box but I have
>been bitten more than once by much less than 5%.

actually i said that all wintel boxes are 5% different from each
other. and my point was that the apple PC will be no better or worse
than the variation of PCs already extant. in grand scapegoating
tradition, i can expect any compatibility issues to be trumpeted,
while the fact that the same issues show up on 30% of other mfrs' PCs
will go unreported, this being "normal" in the windows world.