thanks everyone, this is really helpful.
in light of your experiences, it seems like the best of all worlds might be to use a modern computer/os with Purr Data for editing, make sure to stick with vanilla only objects, and use vanilla for deploying.
anyone see any potential pitfalls there?
-ali
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:00 AM, José Rafael Subía Valdez < jsubiavaldez@gmail.com> wrote:
Same reason as Alexander Connor, I mainly work with computers of different backgrounds, including different OS and many are older than 5 years. The new GUI, although very nice, does cause increased processing. On top of Purr-Data not being supported for mac 10.8 and lower. On a side note, I did test the CEAMMC Puredata distribution and it works better in older systems although it is also not supported. I believe they use QT.
cheers
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Alexander Connor a.connexx@runbox.com wrote:
Increased processing overhead with the new GUI -- assuming that matters with a specific computer set-up.
On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 13:48:09 -0400, Ali Momeni batchku@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
I've been playing around with the latest Purr Data from: https://agraef.github.io/purr-data/
and, well, I love it. The entire experience of working with Pd is much more pleasant.
I'm compelled to ask the group, especially the Pd Vanilla users among
us,
the following simple question:
What reason is there NOT to use Purr Data?
Am I missing something? Subtle disadvantages? Missing functionality? Reliability? Performance?
Thanks,
ali _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/li
stinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/li stinfo/pd-list
-- José Rafael Subía Valdez www.jrsv.net
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list