# Is a Windows based console really a good thing?



## Jezza (Apr 27, 2007)

Alright, so I want to hear what everyones thoughts are on this. Is having a good portion of the most powerful and well respected lighting consoles in the industry Windows based a good thing? 

Windows, as we all know, is not meant to be an "artistic" operating system. Windows is for business men, mathematicians, etc. More importantly, Windows is VULNERABLE. I can't tell you how many times I see Windows running on a standard PC crash, flip out, need tech support, etc. Similarly, I can't tell you how many times I see PC based consoles (like the Hog iPC) go bonkers because of a systems issue with Windows. And come on, we all know we aren't supposed to use the "computer" or standard Windows OS functionality that comes on some of the consoles, but we do, and we all know its not good for the console. There is a reason for that. 

My position on it is this: Windows is an inherently flawed OS. By basing some of the most powerful consoles on it, aren't we just asking for problems? Shouldn't we create proprietary OSs or software versions that can run independently and do exactly what we ask for? "Dummer" consoles such as the simpler ETC consoles and many other of the older conventional consoles have are based on a code that was written exclusively for them. How often do/did you experience a "system error" or "kernal panic" on one of those. 

Now I'm not trying to get in a whole Mac v. PC fight here, but if we are going to base ourselves off of an existing operating system, for simplicity, cost effectiveness, power, etc., doesn't it make sense to go Mac. Mac's track record w/ bugs, customer service, and ingenuity is impeccable compared to Windows. And I'll bet that half of you on here use Macs and the other 50% wished they did. A Mac is built for the artists. If your a designer, board op, electrician, audio engineer etc., you are an artists in your own right. In my mind, it just makes sense.


----------



## Van (Apr 27, 2007)

No I refuse to get into a PC vs. Mac war. Just don't want to go down that road. Having said that I think there are several points at which I disagree with you on a fundamental basis.

"_Windows, as we all know, is not meant to be an "artistic" operating system. Windows is for business men, mathematicians, etc."_

You have been watching too many Mac commercials. I have worked three seperate jobs at which I functioned as a graphics designer, all of which used PC's for their production department. I cut together video, music, graphics, etc. all the time on my PC. as quickly and efficiently as my buddies using a mac. 


_More importantly, Windows is VULNERABLE. I can't tell you how many times I see Windows running on a standard PC crash, flip out, need tech support, etc. Similarly, I can't tell you how many times I see PC based consoles (like the Hog iPC) go bonkers because of a systems issue with Windows. And come on, we all know we aren't supposed to use the "computer" or standard Windows OS functionality that comes on some of the consoles, but we do, and we all know its not good for the console. There is a reason for that._ 

I think you answered you own circular logic on this one. A console PC is a PC for the Console, not for Surfing the net, playing Halo, or attempting to hack the schools mainframe. Currently we run Horizon on a machine that hadn't been replaced for 9 years until last year when the fan on the processor went out. In that time the only "crashes" we ever had were do to power outages, or shorts in the KVM cables. On the same bent I'd prefer to wait the 20 seconds it takes my PC to reboot rather than the 45sec - 1 minute for most Macs.

_My position on it is this: Windows is an inherently flawed OS._

Can't argue with that. It's the best flawed OS out there though. 

_doesn't it make sense to go Mac. Mac's track record w/ bugs, customer service, and ingenuity is impeccable compared to Windows. __And I'll bet that half of you on here use Macs and the other 50% wished they did. _
_ 

Mac's Track record with Bugs is great, Customer service, repair costs, and service availibility, however, is atrosious. When 75% of the kids in high school today can operate and do simple repairs on a PC running Windows, as opposed to having to go spend $200.00 to have a Mac tech tell you he's got to send it back to the factory for a Flugle Valve adjustment. I'd rather keep my Console on a PC thank you. 
_ 

_A Mac is built for the artists. If your a designer, board op, electrician, audio engineer etc., you are an artists in your own right. In my mind, it just makes sense._

Again I'll point you to my opening remark. Apparently you've been watching too many Mac vs. PC commercials. 

Something that you didn't address was cost, this is often the case, when the whole PCvsMac contriversy arises. I can afford to build / buy 2.5 -3 P.C.'s running Windows for my both with the same amount of money that I would need to spend on just one Mac to run sound. in the world of Non-profit ..... 'nuff said.


----------



## gafftaper (Apr 27, 2007)

Two things: 

They are using embedded versions of Windows that are fairly well locked down. There are a lot of things you can't do with it in order to make it more stable. If, as Van said, you are a good little techie and don't mess with the system it should be quite stable. 

Secondly. Console software isn't some some great artistic graphic software. It's a simple program changing number values. The software itself is much closer to a spread sheet than to video editing software. Even WYSIWYG itself is pretty primitive by 3D rendering standards. 

Finally, don't be scared by the Mac disinformation campaign. My Home XP P.C. has only crashed when I was trying to run 6 different programs at the same time. Under normal operation with only 2 or 3 programs open it has never crashed. Windows isn't nearly as unstable and problematic as the commercials want to scare you into believing. Again this is especially true when you are talking about locked down embedded software.


----------



## Footer (Apr 27, 2007)

Totally agree with the above post. If you are doing the PC based console, great, just buy one computer for that, and THATS ALL THAT COMPUTER DOES. Windows is very stable, as long as you don't F with it. But if you want even more stability, go with a linux based console or a DOS based console (strand 300/500 series and the pallet's).


----------



## jmabray (Apr 27, 2007)

> Windows, as we all know, is not meant to be an "artistic" operating system. Windows is for business men, mathematicians, etc




> A Mac is built for the artists. If your a designer, board op, electrician, audio engineer etc., you are an artists in your own right. In my mind, it just makes sense.


The inherent flaw in this argument is simply that a lighting console is doing more math processing than anything else. All of the effects engines are based upon sine, cosine and tangent operations. Running numbers up and down, fade times, etc - these are all mathmatical functions. not an artistic one in the bunch, as far as the computer is concerned.....
To top this all off, if you are running a console that is running xp, it is embedded xp, which is significantly different from the regular xp or xp pro. And considering you aren't loading Doom or surfing the net while you are running a show, you are just fine running xp.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Apr 27, 2007)

Software is software regardless of which os it is on... And PCs are fine if you're not a retard. If your running kazaa and downloading music on a pc you're running a show off of you deserve for it to crash.


----------



## icewolf08 (Apr 27, 2007)

One of the reasons that we will probably never see a Mac OS basd lighting console is because, as Steve Jobs has said: "Apple is not a software company, we make hardware and innovations." This is the same reason that you can't run Mac OS X on a PC, but you can run Windows natively on any Intel Mac. Microsoft is a software company, if a computer manufacturer wants to make a machine that will run Windows, they can, but only Apple can make machines that run OS X.

That being said, if console manufacturers wanted to use another os instead of Windows, the ideal choice would most likely be LINUX or UNIX. Strand was looking at LINUX for the new Palette lines then went with Horizon when Genlyte bought them.

When you look back at the major players in consoles up to today you will notice that almost all of them are DOS based. All of the ETC consoles up to Obsession II and all of the Strand 300/500 series. DOS really has been one of the most stable OS's. Also, if you look at the Obsession II startup, you will notice that the Obsession II runs DOS and then another OS on top, and then Obsession is another program. Whereas Strand OS runs natively in DOS.


----------



## Radman (Apr 28, 2007)

I've heard that the Expression OS was based on Linux, was that true?

I think that a good OS to go with would be Linux: no cost, stable, and its open source


----------



## JD (Apr 28, 2007)

My "Day" job for the last 20 years has been IT work. (Information Technology) The thought of doing a live show on a Windows based control is about the same as getting on an airplane that was being flown by Windows based software.... Probably, nothing will happen, but if it does, it will be really ugly! (Imagine a reboot while there is a stuck scene (or worse) on stage!) Although the GUI in windows supports running a 3d version of your scenes for preview, my first priority is that the stage actually lights up! To "Protest" the migration to Windows based software is like swimming against the current. It's going there if we like it or not! As for Windows vs Mac, don't believe the ads on tv, Macs screw up big time as well. What is needed for any imbedded system is software that is written in machine language custom for that application. Both Mac OS and Windows were written to support 50,000 things that will not be needed to do stage lighting, but might get in the way. EOR (End Of Rant) One good plan would be to have a manual board in your back pocket


----------



## Jezza (Apr 28, 2007)

Just to counter argue, I have not been watching too many Mac v. PC commercials. I have owned both in my lifetime and currently own an Intel based Mac but work with XP based P.C.s every day. So my claims are not based on television ads or propaganda, they are based on real life experience and findings.

That said, this thread did become a Mac v. PC war. My statement about the Mac was just an option to toss out there, not an end-all, be-all solution to the PC based OS. 

I am attempting to address the whether running a lighting console off of any standard homeowner computer operating system (Mac or PC because those are the most popular) is a good idea in general. I attack PC because, well, no one has a Mac based console anymore. And well there may be good reasons why not, to me it is still curious as to why we base ourselves on Windows. Enough Said.


----------



## Footer (Apr 28, 2007)

icewolf08 said:


> One of the reasons that we will probably never see a Mac OS basd lighting console is because, as Steve Jobs has said: "Apple is not a software company, we make hardware and innovations." This is the same reason that you can't run Mac OS X on a PC, but you can run Windows natively on any Intel Mac.
> DOS.



The Lanbox which has been around for a long time was originally programmed for the Mac.


----------



## soundlight (Apr 28, 2007)

Footer4321 said:


> The Lanbox which has been around for a long time was originally programmed for the Mac.



I think that what icewolf08 was trying to get at is that there will never be an actual console (not referring to a DMX interface, not a usb control wing, etc) with a native Mac OS.


----------



## len (Apr 28, 2007)

Footer4321 said:


> Totally agree with the above post. If you are doing the PC based console, great, just buy one computer for that, and THATS ALL THAT COMPUTER DOES. Windows is very stable, as long as you don't F with it. But if you want even more stability, go with a linux based console or a DOS based console (strand 300/500 series and the pallet's).



I don't know anything about Linux, so I can't argue with you that it's more stable. I don't know that any lighting console will work with Linux, either. My guess is that they won't. 

As for the whole "get a pc for your lighting control only" idea, I must be either incredibly lucky or the biggest exception in the world. After over 6 years, I've NEVER had a crash or major issue with mine. If I'm programming/running a show and there's wi-fi I can access, I'm usually surfing or watching youtube WHILE I'm running the show. Sometimes I'll be listening to music, sometimes ... Typically, the machine I'm using is on for 10 - 12 hours straight, and heat could be an issue. But I make sure to keep it very clean and free of dust, and I also use a cooling fan on it.


----------



## JSFox (Apr 28, 2007)

There are a number of very important reasons why so many consoles and other devices are win based. 

First of all to say that this is not an OS war is disengenious. New control systems are going to be CPU based and anything CPU based needs an OS. Writing your own OS is difficult and extremely expensive so using an existing OS is a very quick no-brainer. So, it's an issue then of choosing which one.

Linux is a first option for many and from a purely technical standpoint is generally viewed as the best option but has some drawbacks including lack of commercial support, limited pre-developed and supportable routines, limited hardware support, concerns about future viability, difficulty finding good and affordable developers, and end-users are not as familiar with it.

Mac has 2 huge drawbacks. First is that hardware is limited to Apple (eg, they go under, decide to get out of PC business, don't want to develop a custom platform for a lighting company, etc.) Second is that the OS is fairly closed. Many routines that can be developed on a Linux or Win platform cannot be done on a Mac OS. The folks writing the DL2 & Axon software can tell you all about this. Stability is also questionable as most FCP users can testify.

Win. Has many drawbacks, but are more easily surmountable than those above. It will run on a variety of different CPU's, it's easy to build custom hardware for it, it's commercial viability into the future is high, good developers are plentiful and affordable, there are tons of ancillary programs already written for it, etc. Biggest drawback is stability which can be controlled with good code and error handling routines (and keeping people from playing games on the lighting console). 

Many of the folks developing all of these consoles have done some fairly extensive evaluation of their options and have made the decisions they have for a reason.


----------



## soundlight (Apr 28, 2007)

I think that the key to a good win-based console is not trying to screw with it. Not installing new applications on it unless they are essential to running the lighting program, not using it for anything other than lighting, and updating it as necessary. You may get a lucky streak, but when it ends, your show will...well...black out on a zero count unless you have a HOLD backup on your DMX line somewhere that holds the DMX values for a set amount of time (or infinitely).


----------



## DarSax (Apr 28, 2007)

Screw it I'm building a punch card based console.


----------



## soundlight (Apr 28, 2007)

Haha...there's no way that I can beat that one, but...

And I'll build one with a BASIC stamp 2p40 module.


----------



## wakkoroti (Apr 28, 2007)

icewolf08 said:


> One of the reasons that we will probably never see a Mac OS basd lighting console is because.



The Virtuoso is a Mac based lighting console, and one of the most stable in the industry - just sayin.

Also, Linux isn't the 'holy grail' of OS either, a certain blue console is linux based and well, you know the history of that thing.

Consoles are only as good as the team building it.


----------



## avkid (Apr 28, 2007)

wakkoroti said:


> The Virtuoso is a Mac based lighting console, and one of the most stable in the industry - just sayin.


PRG's Virtuoso® DX2


----------



## JSFox (Apr 28, 2007)

wakkoroti said:


> The Virtuoso is a Mac based lighting console, and one of the most stable in the industry - just sayin.


Still my favorite console even though I'm starting to fall rather deeply for a GrandMA.


----------



## wakkoroti (Apr 28, 2007)

I wish it wasn't so...german ;-)


----------



## fredthe (Apr 28, 2007)

DarSax said:


> Screw it I'm building a punch card based console.


I've got some punchcards here that you can use...


----------



## fredthe (Apr 28, 2007)

JD said:


> My "Day" job for the last 20 years has been IT work. (Information Technology) The thought of doing a live show on a Windows based control is about the same as getting on an airplane that was being flown by Windows based software....


Note that some consoles (The Strand Palette/Light palette) use *Embedded* Windows XP, not standard desktop windows. Unless you've been working in embedded systems development, you have no basis of comaprison.

The Key requirement for a console OS is "real-time" operation; i.e. not having to suddenly wait for your cue to execute while the OS is off doing other things. Embedded XP is designed for this, and is also hardened against being mucked with by the users. There are some variants of Linux that are similarly designed, in addition to several custom systems, such as VXworks. AFAIK, Apple doesn't make an embedded version of OS-X, as their market is strictly interactive users.

Developing for Embedded Windows also has the advantage that an off-line version is easy to produce, as the code is nearly identical to the console code; if the console ran on Linux or VXworks, then they would need to spend additional $$$ on a windows version for off-line use. Note that if the console were Mac-based and the off-line version were also Mac-only, then I could run my off-line version on my Mac, bot not my PC. If the off-line version is PC-based, then I can run it on either my PC, or my (Intel-based) Mac.

So, yes, I will accept that Windows-based consles are the way most manufacturers will go; and if they use Embedded Windows, they will be as stable as any other OS (even VXworks can crash), and they will be able to offer additional features (such as off-line editors and remote control) at a lower cost.


----------



## gafftaper (Apr 28, 2007)

fredthe said:


> and they will be able to offer additional features (such ass off-line editors and remote control) at a lower cost.



Fred I don't think I want an off-line ass editor.  

Anyway, I want to point out that there seem to be two different topics discussed here. 

Topic #1 Consoles like the Strand Palettes that are switching from being DOS based to using embedded Windows XP as their OS. 

Topic #2 Computer based lighting software and a dongle. Why are none of these products Mac/Linux based? 

As far as topic #1 I'm a P.C. guy and I'm very comfortable with XP in my console. Especially with the added stability of it being embedded. I'll Keep the console disconnected from the outside internet and, if I catch someone as much as playing solitaire on my console they'll find them self sorting screws in the shop for a month. 

As far as topic #2 it seems odd that someone out there isn't designing light console software to be run off of a Mac or Linux. Maybe it's just the numbers game of going with the largest number of potential customers. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me as there are a lot of loyal Mac users out there who would go out of their way to buy a product if it ran on their system. It seems like if one company came out with a Mac version of their console software they could really clean up.


----------



## soundlight (Apr 28, 2007)

As has already been mentioned, that would take alot of work with Apple, because only Apple machines can run OS X. This is most likely the major issue blocking the use of the Apple OS for consoles.

Also, as has been stated before, an embedded OS with blocks on user customization is alot more stable then the straight up windows OS, which does have some problems, but is no more stable than the Mac OS. Sure, it requires virus protection, but so does OS X. You may not know it, but there is a team of folks working hard at Apple to make sure that a Mac virus is never developed. Nice of them, isn't it?

Personally, I wish that everyone would just go back to using DOS, just about the most rock-solid OS ever.


----------



## JD (Apr 28, 2007)

What I would love to see is server-side DMX control. (ex: a server and DMX interface on stage, a workstation in the control booth.) The advantage here is it would be platform independent. The workstation would log into the server and run the show in a browser interface. (in other words, no special software on the workstation.) Network speeds are 100m+ which would transparent to DMX control which is about 250k. Also, server OS software tends to be more stable. You could also have multiple workstations all running the same show, or even grab a wireless laptop and sit in the audience! 
Funny, the gaming industry already has all this software figured out! (Just ask a video game nut) 
Well, we can dream can't we?


----------



## wakkoroti (Apr 28, 2007)

JD said:


> What I would love to see is server-side...



http://www.interactive-online.com/cueserver/

This does a little bit of what you said, it's just not very pretty.


----------



## Footer (Apr 28, 2007)

JD said:


> What I would love to see is server-side DMX control. (ex: a server and DMX interface on stage, a workstation in the control booth.) The advantage here is it would be platform independent. The workstation would log into the server and run the show in a browser interface. (in other words, no special software on the workstation.) Network speeds are 100m+ which would transparent to DMX control which is about 250k. Also, server OS software tends to be more stable. You could also have multiple workstations all running the same show, or even grab a wireless laptop and sit in the audience!
> Funny, the gaming industry already has all this software figured out! (Just ask a video game nut)
> Well, we can dream can't we?



They have had variations of that for a long time. They are playback controllers. Strands is the 510i, which you can connect through an xconnect dongle and your good to go. When you pull off of it, it can run a show through SMTP, go button, what have you. Essentially a console in a stand alone box. ETC, High End, and a host of other company's make them. The web access thing isnt there yet, but then again Xconnect is a simple dongle and your good to go, no software to install.


----------



## PadawanGeek (Apr 29, 2007)

I think that with a Mac, manufacturers would be limited on what kind of hardware they could have their consoles be, and if you wanted to get away from Windows, I say go Linux (I don't know why they didn't do that in the first place).


----------



## Radman (Apr 29, 2007)

I heard that the Express software was based on Linux, does anyone know if there's any truth to that?


----------



## pacman (Apr 30, 2007)

I've had six crashes on my Windows XP embedded Congo since September; that's crashes, as in everything locks up & you reboot the console. ETC thinks some of these were software issues, but they can't recreate & identify the cause of most of them, despite having the show & log files. Whether it is a software or hardware issue really doesn't matter to me, I just need a reliable lighting controller and the Congo (unfortunately) has not proven to be reliable for me.


----------



## jfitzpat (Apr 30, 2007)

After Barry Bond's record breaking HR season a fair number of other players started trying mahogany bats. Bond's response, "It's the warrior, not the weapon..." One could argue that it is the warrior, and his chemical enhancement, but the point is still solid.

I am an OS atheist. My first serious exposure to a commercial OS was writing floppy disk support for CP/M (yes, I remember when it was Intergalactic Digital Research). The first time I sent a PC on the road as a controller was a Mac SE on Pink Floid's Momentary Lapse of Reason tour ('87). I've since done commercial development for Mac, Linux, Next, every versions of Windows, and countless commercial kernels.

When Daniel and I decided to do our current controller, we were at a toss up on rather to go Mac or PC. PC had some cheap platform advantages, but Mac seemed under served and we both liked OS X a *lot* more than previous Mac platforms. Linux wasn't even a consideration, between limited desktop deployment and serious technical limitations (even the threading priority model was still broken at the time), it just wasn't interesting - though I'd just targetted the kernel on several project. So we did million operation tests to settle our own PC/Mac debate. 5 runs on each platform. Bottom line 10.2 had a threading bug, and no Mac run got past 500,000. Win 2K and XP went 5 for 5, and all Win95 derivitives had too much latency and dither. So we went Windows and limited to 2K and newer (no 95/98/ME support). If 10.4 had been out, we'd probably be Mac based.

The moral is basically what others have expressed. A controller is a lot more than the OS inside it. Note that none of the OS's mentioned (Mac, Win, Linux, etc.) are RTOS systems, so some engineering has to go into a real time system (albiet a not terribly demanding one) like DMX. So, judge the controller based on its own performance, not any preconceived notions about one part. Similiarly, if a controller proves to be unreliable crap - blame the programmers not the OS. Over the years, I've gotten decent reliability out of even some mega klunker OSs like GEM and the Amiga (principally by bypassing them), so I have no sympathy for mission critical pieces of equipment that are not up to snuff.

-jjf


----------



## Radman (Apr 30, 2007)

RTLinux is real time and commercial. Just throwin that out there... (its also available non commercially)


----------



## len (May 1, 2007)

Every so often someone brings up the issue of console stability. Some argue that pc based is bad, because Windows is bad. But in my experience and in the experience of most LightJockey users, that's just not true. In 6+ years of doing shows, I've never had a crash. AND I was running dj software for the first 5 of those years on the same pc, at the same time. Usually, if the software is stable, then the platform will be fine. If the software isn't, then there's nothing you can do. It will crash.


----------



## jfitzpat (May 1, 2007)

Radman said:


> RTLinux is real time and commercial. Just throwin that out there... (its also available non commercially)



Sorry to be anal, but RTLinux is more of a micro kernel than an operating system. Although it is not as feature rich, it had threading and interrupt management which is similiar to Kadak's AMX (best known as the micro kernal under PalmOS, at least on all the original 68K derivitive basd palm pilot type devices). It certainly would be a big help for someone doing certain types of real time, interrupt intensive, hardware support. However, I'm not sure it would be all that helpful for many DMX controllers.

The problem is that Linux proper then runs as a single, low priority RTLinux thread (the Linux, psuedo posix, thread system then runs under the single RTLinux thread). So a lot of the reasons that a desktop OS is often selected (I want to use the sockets implementation to talk ArtNet, I want to use an existing USB stack to talk to hardware, etc...) are not really accessible to the more robust, pre-emptive RTLinux threads - since you have to use data exchange (fifo, shared memory, etc.) and syncronization to get the data into the low priority Linux thread which, in turn, will handle the requests with the same priority and latency as if RTLinux was not there.

To me, it is also something of an irony that the commercial implementation has been acquired by Wind River. I think it was Wind River's pricing and licensing policies for VxWorks that sent so many companies to Linux for embedded applications in the first place.

-jjf


----------



## Radman (May 1, 2007)

Makes sense. I'm really interested in console development, hardware and software. I'm considering attempting to go into that field. I don't know much yet, but like I said, very interested.


----------



## SteveB (May 1, 2007)

pacman said:


> I've had six crashes on my Windows XP embedded Congo since September; that's crashes, as in everything locks up & you reboot the console. ETC thinks some of these were software issues, but they can't recreate & identify the cause of most of them, despite having the show & log files. Whether it is a software or hardware issue really doesn't matter to me, I just need a reliable lighting controller and the Congo (unfortunately) has not proven to be reliable for me.



OK, you've had crashes. But is it the Congo software that's causing the crashes, or the OS ?. Chances are, given the newness of Congo, that there lies the problem, which might well has nothing to do with the OS. 

I've been using an XP embedded Emphasis system for 8 mos. with no burps, re-boots or crashes of any kind. Go figure, as I suspect Emphasis would be full of bugs as ETC essentially stopped any further upgrades. I also suspect that additional experiences with the assorted Congo versions will give ETC and the AVAB developers additional data that will make your crashes go away.

Steve B.


----------



## Van (May 1, 2007)

jfitzpat said:


> but RTLinux is more of a micro kernel than an operating system.
> -jjf


 

Hey I had Micro Kernals for Breakfast this morning ! They're Tasty and don't lose their crunch in milk.


----------



## jfitzpat (May 2, 2007)

Van said:


> Hey I had Micro Kernals for Breakfast this morning ! They're Tasty and don't lose their crunch in milk.



Come on, I apologized up front - I'm anal about technical matters.

Radman: Feel free to ask whatever you want. Rather it is math for split dipless or an interrupt handler for an AVR, I've always been happy to share whatever help I can. 

-jjf


----------



## Pie4Weebl (May 3, 2007)

Van said:


> Hey I had Micro Kernals for Breakfast this morning ! They're Tasty and don't lose their crunch in milk.


and you win the thread.


----------



## Radman (Jul 1, 2007)

We're using a Jands Vista on the show I'm currently working on, and I happened to notice that it is based on none other than Linux! RedHat to be exact. I think I have a new favorite console.


----------



## lamphead (Jul 1, 2007)

For the Mac people out there
http://sourceforge.net/projects/maclightpoc/


----------



## Footer (Jul 1, 2007)

Jezza said:


> to me it is still curious as to why we base ourselves on Windows. Enough Said.



it was not until the ipod and 0SX came out that apple really made somethi ng of itself. Basically, the period that Steve Jobs left apple nearly ran the company into the ground. OS9 and OS8 compared to windows 95/98 was not even a battle. On top of that, system 7 was not even a competitor, even to windows 3.1. Windows simply blew it away. Also, apple hardware was pretty crappy at the time. Apple had the home market with the apple IIe but after that they simply did not innovate the way that the rest of the industry did (Yes the lisa was nice, but 10 grand for a PC is a bit overkill). Apple lost the market way back when, and has never fully recovered in numbers that they once had. Its only been in the last 5 years that apple has been a real player, and they can thank most of that from the ipod. 

Now the real question is why aren't we all using os2 warp or solaris?? (also whoever gets that without looking it up gets 3 geek points)


----------



## Jezza (Jul 1, 2007)

Footer4321 said:


> Its only been in the last 5 years that apple has been a real player, and they can thank most of that from the ipod.



Although I agree at before OSX, Apple didn't really have much to say for itself, I can't help but disagree with the statement that Apple really only has the iPod to thank for its success. Yes, the iPod has been a tremendous source of income and publicity for the company, but I don't see how you can can say that OSX hasn't been a breakthrough in terms of OS and hasn't brought the company huge success. Lets not forget that OSX was out for a good two years I believe before XP came out, and even then was superior. I can't make any claims about Vista having not used it. However, as a MacBook Pro user with Parallels running XP, I can honestly say hands down I would rather be running OSX, specifically any off-line editor or pre-vis software on a Mac. Vari-lite specked a Apple for their Virtuoso line which has since gone to PRG, as did High End in the beginning with the DL 1. There were obvious reasons behind that.


----------



## Footer (Jul 1, 2007)

Jezza said:


> Although I agree at before OSX, Apple didn't really have much to say for itself, I can't help but disagree with the statement that Apple really only has the iPod to thank for its success. Yes, the iPod has been a tremendous source of income and publicity for the company, but I don't see how you can can say that OSX hasn't been a breakthrough in terms of OS and hasn't brought the company huge success. Lets not forget that OSX was out for a good two years I believe before XP came out, and even then was superior. I can't make any claims about Vista having not used it. However, as a MacBook Pro user with Parallels running XP, I can honestly say hands down I would rather be running OSX, specifically any off-line editor or pre-vis software on a Mac. Vari-lite specked a Apple for their Virtuoso line which has since gone to PRG, as did High End in the beginning with the DL 1. There were obvious reasons behind that.



Its the iPod that has introduced the majority of current apple users to mac. They look at the iPod and how easy it works and want their entire computer to work that way. iPod sales pre iTunes for windows was very small. I have a 3rd gen iPod that originally shipped with musicmatch. It was the most annoying experience of my life. After itunes for windows came out iPod sales jumped a huge amount. Apples best selling piece of hardware (at least pre-2 days ago), the iPod is primarly used on windows computers. Its the iPod that has led to a larger mac acceptance. Also, it took apple 5 years to catch up to microsoft with OSX. Durring that time microsoft took hold of the market. Also, OSX was released march of 2001, and XP came out October of 2001. Windows 2000 which XP was built on was out way before OSX. 

I am not trying to say that OSX is a great product and has help boost sales, but it was the ipod that help take people to OSX. Also the fact that people are now buying laptops in place of desktops is also helping apple due to the quality of their laptops. On top of that the ability to run windows on an apple product is a huge deal that has really helped boost sales. The next laptop I buy (i have a d600 now that has been going strong for several years) will be a mac most likely, and I will run bootcamp on it without question.

I will be interested to see how the iPhone affects apple computer sales. As far as high end speking apple gear, that goes without question. Apple computers are used by most editors simply because of final cut pro.


----------



## gafftaper (Jul 1, 2007)

Footer4321 said:


> it was not until the ipod and 0SX came out that apple really made somethi ng of itself. Basically, the period that Steve Jobs left apple nearly ran the company into the ground. OS9 and OS8 compared to windows 95/98 was not even a battle. On top of that, system 7 was not even a competitor, even to windows 3.1. Windows simply blew it away. Also, apple hardware was pretty crappy at the time. Apple had the home market with the apple IIe but after that they simply did not innovate the way that the rest of the industry did (Yes the lisa was nice, but 10 grand for a PC is a bit overkill). Apple lost the market way back when, and has never fully recovered in numbers that they once had. Its only been in the last 5 years that apple has been a real player, and they can thank most of that from the ipod.
> Now the real question is why aren't we all using os2 warp or solaris?? (also whoever gets that without looking it up gets 3 geek points)



Ahh... os2 warp... that was going to be so cool... still waiting. 

Ah the MAC vs PC war again... I would love to have an os for my PC that is as cool as OSX. However I refuse to join the proprietary mac only hardware world. I bought a new computer in 1989... since then I have upgraded and upgraded, bought a new part here and there. I have long ago replaced every part of that system but I've never spent more than a couple hundred dollars at any time, gradually updating, using the best parts available from dozens of different manufacturers. Try doing that with an Apple... oh yeah you can't you have to throw it away and give them another two grand. The day Apple gives up control of it's hardware is the day I convert. I refuse to buy a product that I can't do all the repairs myself, can't get parts from multiple manufacturers in a competitive market, and eventually reach the point that you can't upgrade you have to just throw it away. Until then I'm not playing their hardware big brother game. (2 geek points for getting that reference).

Oh yeah and one other little note for the more general anti-Microsoft folks... back in those years when Apple was really screwed up... Microsoft purchased a huge portion of Apple to save it from bankruptcy. I believe they are still one of the largest owners of Apple stock... so when you throw away your old Apple to "Upgrade" to a new one, Microsoft makes money. 

Me? I'm going to join the real rebels and go Linux one of these days.


----------



## Jezza (Jul 1, 2007)

Footer-

-I am as well interested to see what the iPhone does to Apple as a company. I think that the issues with it being first generation at all are great. Apple needs to open it up to other software developers, they need to increase the capacity of the hard drive, add blue tooth, and for god sake get off of Cingular! But, I would love to purchase one in a year or two when it gets through a generation or two and is offered by other carries, such as Verizon.


----------



## Footer (Jul 1, 2007)

Jezza said:


> Footer-
> -I am as well interested to see what the iPhone does to Apple as a company. I think that the issues with it being first generation at all are great. Apple needs to open it up to other software developers, they need to increase the capacity of the hard drive, add blue tooth, and for god sake get off of Cingular! But, I would love to purchase one in a year or two when it gets through a generation or two and is offered by other carries, such as Verizon.



Well, it has bluetooth already. They do need to either fix the edge network or get it on another carrier, however I think they do need to stay with a GSM provider, so verizon and sprint are off of that list. If they get the edge network to move faster, it will improve the service greatly. Also, there is no way AT&T will let the iPhone go. They (AT&T) are paying a ton of money to apple for the iphone, when most phone manufactuers pay AT&T to carry their phone. They are currently in a 5 year contract with AT&T. I would love to get one when it can truly replace my PDA, iPod, and phone. It needs to be at least 20gb for that to happen. They would be a godsend for anyone who lives on the road. Also, I want to run tom tom on it and have built in GPS.


----------



## Peter (Jul 1, 2007)

The simple reason for Apple's success and what will be their downfall (if they dont change) is the fact that they control the whole package: hardware, software, licenceing, and probably soon some people's brains. Because they control every aspect of their products, they can make everything work well together and streamline things for the customer, however this, as mentioned, comes at the price of non-upgradeablity and being locked into their stuff so you just have to keep forking $ over too them. 

The iPhone will be interesting in itself because of the partnership with AT&T. I think how this deal turns out will largely dictate the direction Apple takes in the future. If it works out, I expect Apple to slowly tip toe its way into more partnerships because they'll be plowed over by the rest of the market if they dont get out there and play nice sooner or later. If AT&T messes things up somehow, I expect to see Apple starting to look more like Google where they go and set up their own services to support their other services. The difference with google is (for now) they are playing nice with other's especially in the areas of interopability, and they do not directly charge customers for their services. 

Anyways, it's all interesing stuff. 

I have a Vista disc and I've played around with it, there's some stuff I love, and there's other stuff that's just annoying and that I thought would be fixed by now. My next machine will probably be a Vista / Linux dual boot.


----------



## Footer (Jul 1, 2007)

Peter said:


> I have a Vista disc and I've played around with it, there's some stuff I love, and there's other stuff that's just annoying and that I thought would be fixed by now. My next machine will probably be a Vista / Linux dual boot.



With the liscensing thing, apples aproach is "are stuff works, period". Apple does support a large variety of 3rd party software, so they are used to that game. 

My only gripe with vista is how it plays with itunes ironicly. Currently, iTunes works somewhat, but quicktime has HUGE issues with it. Vista has some great things, and aero is pretty sweet.


----------



## Van (Jul 2, 2007)

I-phone, Maximum PC did a really cool introspective on it a couple of months ago. I was amazed at the limitations. The AT&T/ Cingular networks speed of d/l's is atrocious. < Notice that AT&T "reclaimed" Cingular right before the Iphone Launch?> 
The lack of open development for software for the Iphone is going to kill it. Apple says it has to have all these restrictions to keep it safe and secure, I say, Monopoly baby! $600.00 Iphones? People are going to be laughing about that that same way we laugh about $250.00 Sony walkmans. 

Linux, I followed instructions in a recent edition of Maximum PC < detecting a trend here?> I installed Ubuntu, in under 1.5 hrs. I had a working, fast, network enabled, OS on my machine, configured for my use without annoying popups everytwo seconds in under 2 hrs. Now don't get me wrong, I HATE the command line structure necessary for installing almost anything, but that's because I spent my time in the trenches I learned Basic, advanced Basic, Tandy Basic, Dos 1.2-7.1, I want to click on an installsheild auto executible and watch my software install itself for me. Some things are really made a lot easier by the Installation of Beryl, which makes Ubuntu look/behave a lot like a Vista machine. I think if I could get over the command line thing I might actually use Linux more often, Hell, Open Office is almost completely seamless with MS Ofice. The Ubuntu install comes with the equivalants of MS Office, Photoshop, Media Player, Explorer, Outlook, yadda,yadda,yadda, and it's ... Free!


As For PC/Mac, They both have their place, I prefer PC's, I can fix them if they break. About 100Million American highschool kids can fix them if I can't. Mac's, I don't know, I thnk you wave a hundred dollar bill over the mobo, and pray to the spirit of Steve Jobs that something start working. 
Here, read this, http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html


----------



## derekleffew (Oct 6, 2007)

Van, here's my valued (in my own mind) opinion.

PCs are straight, Macs are gay, I am bi-computeral, and Linuxs are transgendered. An OS trapped in a Personal Computer's body.

Back to the OP's original question:
Using a home PC to run lights is begging for trouble. Unless, 1) a minimal install of XP is done, first wiping the drive, 2) it is never connected to the internet or any other non-lighting network [thinking ETCnet, MA-net, Hog3-net, et al], and 3) only the Lighting System Software is installed. Even then I'm against it as you never know when a kid with Doom on his thumb drive will do something when you're not watching.

Windows Embedded XP is perfectly acceptable, as was/is Embedded DOS, and I don't know if there's such a thing as Embedded Linux, but I would be okay with that too. Does any "real" Lighting Console use Linux/Unix? Would they tell us if they did? Why did grandMA choose to use VX Works? Stability, even though it took them over 5 years to enable the USB ports for storage.

All PLCs used for mission-critical life-safety systems are "locked-down" and don't allow games or the WWW or any software other than their own. I can't think right now of the OS Allen-Bradley uses, but it's a ladder logic program, specifically designed for process control, factory automation, and fire supression systems, and the like, Logix? Used to be...? Would you trust your* life* to your HomePC running XP-Professional OR your MacPro running OS 10.4.10? How about the balls of fire that shoot out of Treasure Island and the Mirage Volcano every 15 minutes, weather permitting? 

I didn't think so.

YMMV.


----------



## Grog12 (Oct 6, 2007)

So Derek you just cathcin up on a lot of old threads today?


And btw for anyone who wants my opinion on Windows based consoles see the punching bag....


----------



## derekleffew (Oct 6, 2007)

Youz gotta problem wit dat?


----------



## Grog12 (Oct 6, 2007)

Only in that it makes me giggle...and want to pinch your cheeks...but that may be because I'm sitting in a tech that I don't care about and am trying not to be angry about it.


----------



## Radman (Oct 6, 2007)

derekleffew said:


> Van, here's my valued (in my own mind) opinion.
> 
> PCs are straight, Macs are gay, I am bi-computeral, and Linuxs are transgendered. An OS trapped in a Personal Computer's body.
> 
> ...


Jands Vista uses Linux.

MA finally enabled USB?!?!
I think I read about that actually...

Doom on a thumb drive just made me wonder really badly if you could boot a LiveCD on any consoles...

In turn, that made me think that it would be great to have a bootable external hard drive (or iPod) with something similar to a LiveCD on it, so that when you plug it in and boot the computer you get a fresh OS that can't be screwed up. You could have it set up with Windows emulation (assuming its Linux, I don't know of any other OSs with LiveCDs) and all your console software installed. You'd be able to save shows to recall later of course, but basically no matter what you did (short of deleting the system) you'd have it brand new with just a reboot! I wonder if you could do that with Windows though, cause I'm not sure how much you can do under Winows emulation...

Yeep, I'm getting ideas...

I'm a fan of Linux in case you haven't noticed yet.  But I love Apple hardware (omg sexy).


----------



## derekleffew (Oct 6, 2007)

Radman said:


> Jands Vista uses Linux.


 Note I said "Embedded Linux." I think you're going down the wrong path. Trying to figure a way to "restore" a system that should never have been corrupted in the first place. Along the same lines I recently told a console developer how I wanted the system to behave in the event of a crash. He said, "wouldn't you prefer they never crashed at all?" Doooh. 

I want a Lighting Control Console that won't allow the user to get to the OS, or the bios, or the boot area of the drive. That's the way they've always been, and that's the way they should always be. I forget where on ControlBooth I mentioned the Colortran Gold Medallion that ran on OS/9 (not the Apple one), but the console died prematurely due to the OS and non-acceptance by the industry, among other reasons.


----------



## derekleffew (Oct 6, 2007)

Grog12 said:


> Only in that it makes me giggle...and want to pinch your cheeks...but that may be because I'm sitting in a tech that I don't care about and am trying not to be angry about it.


1) Cheek pinching may be considered inappropriate touching or PDA

2) How can you NOT care about your tech. rehearsal? 
We've got magic to do........ Just for you
We've got miracle plays to play
We've got parts to perform.... Hearts to warm
Kings and things to take by storm
As we go along our way

3) Don't get mad, get even.


----------



## Grog12 (Oct 6, 2007)

derekleffew said:


> 1) Cheek pinching may be considered inappropriate touching or PDA
> 2) How can you NOT care about your tech. rehearsal?
> We've got magic to do........ Just for you
> We've got miracle plays to play
> ...



Namely because its not my Tech reh.....

And don't worry I will get even.


----------



## Radman (Feb 15, 2010)

Radman said:


> We're using a Jands Vista on the show I'm currently working on, and I happened to notice that it is based on none other than Linux! RedHat to be exact. I think I have a new favorite console.



Bringing back an old thread here, but I was poking around a Vista console software update iso and noticed that it's actually based on Ubuntu. I was able to boot the image in VirtualBox and get it installed. Unfortunately the emulated hardware isn't a perfect match, so some things (notably the X server) don't work without some tweaking of config files and whatnot, but it's fascinating seeing the OS behind the machine. They even left Firefox installed.

CTRL-ALT-F4, sudo su, passwd
I now own root. That's all it takes on the console. It looks like sshd is running by default, too. I wonder why.

Lots of fun to be had with this.


----------



## Footer (Feb 15, 2010)

Radman said:


> Bringing back an old thread here, but I was poking around a Vista console software update iso and noticed that it's actually based on Ubuntu. I was able to boot the image in VirtualBox and get it installed. Unfortunately the emulated hardware isn't a perfect match, so some things (notably the X server) don't work without some tweaking of config files and whatnot, but it's fascinating seeing the OS behind the machine. They even left Firefox installed.
> 
> CTRL-ALT-F4, sudo su, passwd
> I now own root. That's all it takes on the console. It looks like sshd is running by default, too. I wonder why.
> ...



The software that originally shipped on the Strand Pallete pre-horizon merge ran on top of knoppix. You actually booted to the desktop and launched the console frontend. You also had the ability to launch x-connect and operate that way. It ran in a frontend/backend configuration. They left firefox there for remote access to dimmers and nodes.


----------



## Morpheus (Feb 17, 2010)

All I could think of is:
Sure, have an Apple console - you do realize, though, that if it ran OSX, Apple would have to build it, it would probably cost $80,000 and only have one button.

On the plus side, it would be about the size of a DMX terminator.


----------



## tk2k (Feb 17, 2010)

I honestly have to agree with the origial point of this topic. I think it is pretty much inexcusable for any lighting console OS to be based off something designed for multitasking and consumers.

I've been using an Express and and Expression 3 for many years now, and nether has ever crashed, frozen, or for any reason needed to be rebooted (obvioulsy i have though). I can't say that about any modern OS. 

coming from a purely technical perspective, modern desktop OSes are ill suited to the demadns of mission critical always on tasks. For example, there's a reason the vast majority of websites are run on Linux or Unix servers, and not Unbuntu or OS X, but barebones Linux dedicated to a few complex tasks and nothing more. They can stay on for a year or more and not suffer from memory leaks or creeping page files. Try leavng your PC or MAC on (sleep is fine, just not rebooted) for more than a week and you'll run into sluggist peformance. 

That's how console OS's should be. It's not hard, developers are, honestly, becoming lazy.


----------



## icewolf08 (Feb 17, 2010)

tk2k said:


> I honestly have to agree with the origial point of this topic. I think it is pretty much inexcusable for any lighting console OS to be based off something designed for multitasking and consumers.
> 
> I've been using an Express and and Expression 3 for many years now, and nether has ever crashed, frozen, or for any reason needed to be rebooted (obvioulsy i have though). I can't say that about any modern OS.
> 
> ...



First off, most consoles that came before the current generation ran on DOS. Yup, a desktop OS. Arguably the best desktop OS that Microsoft ever came up with... Then you had consoles like Obsession II which ran DOS with VXWorks on top and then the Obsession software (and people wonder why OBII was so unstable).

Just remember to look at the fact that the Embedded OS is designed to do what it is being asked to do. It should be pretty good at doing that. Also consider that what we ask most lighting consoles to is far from a major demand on processing time. If you look at the processing power of older consoles compared to todays and consider the fact that the biggest difference in how the console works is in the GUI, we aren't really demanding more today that we were 10 years ago.


----------



## NickVon (Feb 17, 2010)

tk2k said:


> They can stay on for a year or more and not suffer from memory leaks or creeping page files. Try leavng your PC or MAC on (sleep is fine, just not rebooted) for more than a week and you'll run into sluggist peformance.
> 
> That's how console OS's should be. It's not hard, developers are, honestly, becoming lazy.



my personal home PC get restarted every oh..... 3 weeks? and thats usually become some OS update or major Sound or Video driver updates wants a reboot?.... am i bad


----------



## SHARYNF (Feb 17, 2010)

It is not that developers are getting lazy it is just economic sense

The whole instability issue is IMO overblown IF you are using the system in a dedicated non internet connected environment. The in stability comes from the varying hardware configurations, the various additional software that people install and the downloading and visiting to various internet sites and email.

For a company today to want to start from scratch and design their own OS makes little sense, it is not economical, it means that the testing base is very limited, and it means that if you try to hire program development folks they need to learn a new system.

Most memory leak issues on the PC world went away XP. 

Sharyn


----------



## JChenault (Feb 17, 2010)

tk2k said:


> coming from a purely technical perspective, modern desktop OSes are ill suited to the demadns of mission critical always on tasks. For example, there's a reason the vast majority of websites are run on Linux or Unix servers, and not Unbuntu or OS X, but barebones Linux dedicated to a few complex tasks and nothing more. They can stay on for a year or more and not suffer from memory leaks or creeping page files. Try leavng your PC or MAC on (sleep is fine, just not rebooted) for more than a week and you'll run into sluggist peformance.
> 
> That's how console OS's should be. It's not hard, developers are, honestly, becoming lazy.




Well - Speaking as an ex Amazon.com engineer - most large websites are used on some version of Linux. The reason is not reliability, however but cost and maintenence. You don't pay a license fee for Linux. When we went to it we saved about 10 million a year. Linux is designed to be operated remotely. IE you don't have to have to be close to the machine to work on it which you tend to do in Windows. 

No computer system of hardware and / or software is 100% reliable all the time. As you get more reliable costs tend to escalate. The question of how many nines of reliability do you want to buy? 99.999 percent is a lot more money that 99.9%.

When we developed mLight, we ran a version for six months with running cues. Ran find - no crashes - no hiccups, no memory leaks. This is on Windows. Over the last year at the Oregon Shakespeare festival ( Three theatres, around 800 performances) I am aware of one crash. That was due to a bug in our code that we immediately fixed.

In my experience, if you treat a Windows based console as a console, not as something to surf the web on, or do mail on, etc. IE you devote the computer to just that one function - remove virus scanning and all other extraneous programs, it is very reliable. The key is not to think of it as a general purpose computer.


----------



## LeadHead (Feb 17, 2010)

tk2k said:


> I honestly have to agree with the origial point of this topic. I think it is pretty much inexcusable for any lighting console OS to be based off something designed for multitasking and consumers.
> 
> coming from a purely technical perspective, modern desktop OSes are ill suited to the demadns of mission critical always on tasks. For example, there's a reason the vast majority of websites are run on Linux or Unix servers, and not Unbuntu or OS X, but barebones Linux dedicated to a few complex tasks and nothing more. They can stay on for a year or more and not suffer from memory leaks or creeping page files.* Try leavng your PC or MAC on (sleep is fine, just not rebooted) for more than a week and you'll run into sluggist peformance.
> * .



This particular copy of Windows 7 has been running for 22 days straight so far. I use it for everything from e-mail and web browsing to gaming and instant messaging. Our main "family" computer runs Ubuntu Linux, and its been up for 28 days so far. Both Windows 7 and the Ubuntu PC are running just fast as they did the minute they were booted up. I have a friend who hasn't rebooted her Macbook Pro in probably two months - still fast as ever. 

Windows Server 2008? Just Windows Vista/7 with some of the fat trimmed away, and extra networking features thrown in. Server/Enterprise editions of linux? Pretty much the same Ubuntu/Fedora/Whatever we're all have come to know and love with the fat trimmed off and some networking features thrown in. 

The Windows NT (Windows 2000 and after(except ME)) and Linux kernel/core are very stable very reliable things, even with a bunch of stuff wrapped around them like pretty GUIs and the like. Like JChenault mentioned, if you treat modern "consumer" operating systems like you would an enterprise/mission critical system they'll behave in much the same way with much the same reliability. This isn't the DOS based Windows 95/98/ME days that would blue screen and reset if you looked at your monitor the wrong way.


----------



## Lightguy48 (Feb 17, 2010)

Well I got to chime in as well, would I take my home computer and put a lighting console on it? Absolutely not, but I certainly use it regularly as an offline editor.

However, would I take a stripped down copy of XP and put a lighting console on it? Absolutely, wouldn't think twice about it.

As has been mentioned numerous times XP or any current Windows flavor based on the NT kernel is a good operating system and is solid when it is based on solid hardware.

Speaking from my other job in radio and TV I can tell you there are THOUSANDS of radio and TV stations on the air at this very moment running very reliably on Windows and they're handling a lot more tasks than just running some lighting cues. They're stable and reliable because we don't let people browse the internet or use email or IM on them, they do one thing, play music or video and that's it. No different than a lighting console.

Even with the monthly security updates we have to install every month and nightly virus scans they still sit there and play music every day. 

Pick you favorite station... Z100 in New York, KISS (KHKS) in Dallas, or KIIS in LA, it's running Windows and NexGen and it runs.

So there's your testimonial for Windows and reliability. Perfect, no, but reliable when set up and maintained properly.


----------

