ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB: The Classic Live Audio Board => Topic started by: Taff Hewton on April 05, 2016, 08:14:55 PM
-
I have a question to console manufacturers. Why is it, that apart from perhaps Qsc, you only seem to to use i pad systems to remotely control the mixer. Now in the USA, I can understand that I guess, given Americans love affair with things Apple, but the rest of the world uses far more android devices than ios.
-
Read the rules, fix your display name.
Thank you for your cooperation.
-
Consistency of Hardware and OS. An iPad will all have very regulated specs making is easier for assured app performance.
with Android tabs, and multiple layers of themes/sizes and tweaks to the OS, various hardware configurations etc, there is a higher possibility of errors. Hardware manufacturers may choose to avoid the extra expense of maintaining a fragmented ecosystem.
the X32 also has a very capable Android app.
Im no Apple fanboy, but own the tools needed for the job.
-
Consistency of Hardware and OS.
Not so sure of that. The expected lifespan of mixing platforms exceeds that of all brands of tablets and PC's, and certainly exceeds factory support.
Case in point: TTI's handheld spectrum analyzer originally used an integrated Palm for interface...and guess where future service issues emanated from? The AudioControl Industrial SA3050 I purchased@1988 still works 100% (usefulness? Well...) "Tools" are simple, reliable, hard to break, and last.
If it is mission-critical please give me a dedicated piece of hardware, not a co-opted consumer item. If a general-purpose PC is required, make it a ToughBook.
-
I have a question to console manufacturers. Why is it, that apart from perhaps Qsc, you only seem to to use i pad systems to remotely control the mixer.
I'd ask manufacturers why more don't create OS-agnostic means of controlling their devices (like Soundcraft's Si series, which any HTML5 browser can control)?
Having written and supported software, I understand the need for vendors to chose their battles.
I'm not a fan of Apple, but do appreciate the fact that they update their OS across all devices. Android devices are stuck with the OS they were "born" with, which makes developing code for the multiple versions still in use a challenge.
Dave
-
Like the rest have stated. Developing for the iPad is a consistent platform. All but the very original iPad can run the lates OS, and Apple makes it easy to write the software once and have it work across all devices.
While there may be more total android devices sold, there isn't a single model that outsells the iPad. Every android tablet model has its own twist. For a manufacturer to test every possibility would be nearly impossible, so instead of releasing a product that might work, they focus their energy on what actually does.
-
Like the rest have stated. Developing for the iPad is a consistent platform. All but the very original iPad can run the lates OS, and Apple makes it easy to write the software once and have it work across all devices.
While there may be more total android devices sold, there isn't a single model that outsells the iPad. Every android tablet model has its own twist. For a manufacturer to test every possibility would be nearly impossible, so instead of releasing a product that might work, they focus their energy on what actually does.
Yada yada yada.
So how is it that David Giga's Android apps work on damn near every Android device?
If one guy can do this, on his own.... why can't Digico, Yamaha, AVID or others? I'm not buying the bullshit answers we've been given.
-
Yada yada yada.
So how is it that David Giga's Android apps work on damn near every Android device?
If one guy can do this, on his own.... why can't Digico, Yamaha, AVID or others? I'm not buying the bullshit answers we've been given.
Tim, did you put an extra spoonful of curmudgeon in your coffee this morning?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Tim, did you put an extra spoonful of curmudgeon in your coffee this morning?
No Rob, that would be the "Anvil of Reality"
Chris.
-
Tim, did you put an extra spoonful of curmudgeon in your coffee this morning?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I borrowed a cup from your charming wife. I hope there was enough for you. ;)
But basically I see it like this: If David G can sit at home in his pajamas and write console control apps for Android, why can't anyone else? Does David hold the Majik Key to something? Is there a unicorn dictating code to him in his dreams?
IOW, if this guy can do it I have serious doubts about the responses we've gotten from console manufacturers. Their lack of candor speaks more loudly than their few words so I call bullshit.
That AVID can't manage to come up with a control app for their VENUE mixers is absolutely, totally 200% inexcusable, too (and we're an Avid shop). I guess until Scovi embraces tablet mixing there will be no Avid app for *any* platform.
-
I borrowed a cup from your charming wife. I hope there was enough for you. ;)
But basically I see it like this: If David G can sit at home in his pajamas and write console control apps for Android, why can't anyone else? Does David hold the Majik Key to something? Is there a unicorn dictating code to him in his dreams?
IOW, if this guy can do it I have serious doubts about the responses we've gotten from console manufacturers. Their lack of candor speaks more loudly than their few words so I call bullshit.
That AVID can't manage to come up with a control app for their VENUE mixers is absolutely, totally 200% inexcusable, too (and we're an Avid shop). I guess until Scovi embraces tablet mixing there will be no Avid app for *any* platform.
Yes.
I am right there with you, Tim.
There is nothing magic about it, it is just software. Now some software is easier to control externally than other software is. Regardless, considering the direction of our industry in general, these guys should be expanding the functionality of the software, not making excuses why they "can't" do it.
-
But basically I see it like this: If David G can sit at home in his pajamas and write console control apps for Android, why can't anyone else? Does David hold the Majik Key to something? Is there a unicorn dictating code to him in his dreams?
I don't know the man, his pajamas or his software...but, would guess he's using lowest common denominator code to provide maximum compatibility. Not to say that's a bad thing - just the exception rather than the rule.
Developers love toys so, as soon as new software is released, they want to utilize it. Providing if/then statements for multiple versions creates code bloat and potential tech support issues. I don't like that my Android phone won't run the latest Delta app, but I understand the reasoning.
Dave
-
I don't know the man, his pajamas or his software...but, would guess he's using lowest common denominator code to provide maximum compatibility. Not to say that's a bad thing - just the exception rather than the rule.
Developers love toys so, as soon as new software is released, they want to utilize it. Providing if/then statements for multiple versions creates code bloat and potential tech support issues. I don't like that my Android phone won't run the latest Delta app, but I understand the reasoning.
Dave
Yeah, but this isn't a spyware app with lots of whiz-bang; it's a user interface to defined functions of a network computer (mixer).
Look at the size of Mixing Station and then compare to most apps - it's relatively small. Could it be smaller/lighter/faster/cheaper/win the war for the Allies? Possibly.
But again, I offer this point: if a reasonably talented guy can develop this in his spare time, for donations, why can't console manufacturers do it (or hire it done)?
-
But basically I see it like this: If David G can sit at home in his pajamas and write console control apps for Android, why can't anyone else? Does David hold the Majik Key to something? Is there a unicorn dictating code to him in his dreams?
IOW, if this guy can do it I have serious doubts about the responses we've gotten from console manufacturers. Their lack of candor speaks more loudly than their few words so I call bullshit.
Think about it this way. If David writes an app, and that app has a bug in it that causes a mixer to go bork mid show, the manufacturer can say it was a problem with the third party app. If it was their app and their console, now they take the brunt of the failure.
Yes, writing apps can be done, but making sure that app won't cause a meltdown of the system in some unforeseen scenario requires far more resources to accomplish. There have to be many more checks assurances in place before a manufacturer can put their name on a product in the wild. The risk to their reputation has a much higher value than someone that is developing on their own.
-
Think about it this way. If David writes an app, and that app has a bug in it that causes a mixer to go bork mid show, the manufacturer can say it was a problem with the third party app. If it was their app and their console, now they take the brunt of the failure.
Yes, writing apps can be done, but making sure that app won't cause a meltdown of the system in some unforeseen scenario requires far more resources to accomplish. There have to be many more checks assurances in place before a manufacturer can put their name on a product in the wild. The risk to their reputation has a much higher value than someone that is developing on their own.
Sure. So again, how long does this take? Three months? Nine months? 3 years? Never?
-
Yes, writing apps can be done, but making sure that app won't cause a meltdown of the system in some unforeseen scenario requires far more resources to accomplish. There have to be many more checks assurances in place before a manufacturer can put their name on a product in the wild. The risk to their reputation has a much higher value than someone that is developing on their own.
In some ways, I feel like making sure the app won't cause a meltdown is more a case of making sure that the console's networking interface is well implemented and isolated enough from the DSP so that any network issues won't cause a meltdown. Given how many gigs are relying on wireless networking these days, I've often wondered how well insert-name-of-console-here would stand up to, say, a simple denial of service attack (I have a few guesses, and most of them are "poorly")? In theory, if it can survive that, surely it should be able to survive anything a buggy app can throw at it (and it if can't survive that, is it only a matter of time before the show, possibly even with a Band You've Heard Of, comes grinding to a halt because of network intrusion?).
-Russ
-
I'd ask manufacturers why more don't create OS-agnostic means of controlling their devices (like Soundcraft's Si series, which any HTML5 browser can control)?
Dave
+1. this i have found to be a fantastic approach. I believe harman bought the company that first did it and they are now the soundcraft Ui series.
-
That AVID can't manage to come up with a control app for their VENUE mixers is absolutely, totally 200% inexcusable..
I was actually stunned when Digico made an app! The general impression i got was the likes of Avid and Digico considered app mixing a tool for amateurs only.. hehe..
-
Guys - I work at a company that makes app enabled robots, and I can attest that coding for products the need to communicate with hardware is a different bag than just apps, even when using Unity to have a common code base.
Android's "do whatever you want" attitude means that HTC, Acer, Asus, etc. can slap whatever processors, BT chip, etc into a tablet and call it android compatible. What we've found is that there's a significant amount of work needed for each tablet manufacturer to make it work (we use BTLE vs. WiFi) reliably with a lot of RT data being passed back and forth. Samsung Galaxy's work well, as do Kindle Fire Tablets. HTC? Asus? Not so much. All that time trying to figure out if you can patch the app to work with a cheap Android tablet is time not spent on adding key features to the iOS or Android version - or fixing key issues.
-
Sure. So again, how long does this take? Three months? Nine months? 3 years? Never?
It comes down to business sense to dedicate the resources to such a project. How many more consoles would they sell by having an android app vs just an iPad app? My guess is that number isn't going to be huge. Most people that want remote control will just get a tablet that works with the console of their choice. Very few would make their buying decision of the console based on the platform of tablet that is needed for remote control.
Android tablets, being as random as they are, with many different hardware sets and software versions require vastly more resources for proper development, yet, represent a sliver of the market. It doesn't make financial sense to dedicate resources there.
-
That AVID can't manage to come up with a control app for their VENUE mixers is absolutely, totally 200% inexcusable, too (and we're an Avid shop). I guess until Scovi embraces tablet mixing there will be no Avid app for *any* platform.
Avid has a remote app for Protools, which works...ok. I need to see ALOT more functionality in it to really make it useful for me. But they keep laying off their developers, so I'm not sure who in the company will even be able to get around to working out the bugs in the PT Control app. It's been out for over 6 months now, and has only had one update, which itself is six months old now.
I suspect that the real reason that we don't see many Android apps is that the SDK agreement that Apple has with these major audio companies requires them to sign a non-compete clause which prevents them from developing for Android.
Android tablets are rare in our industry because no one write any software for them.
Worldwide, there are many, many more times Android devices in use as there are Apple products.
-
I have using X32's for the past 3 years and the tablet mixing has become my bread and butter. Set up bands with a $1K mixer and I can walk in and mix without touching a thing. Good for them, good for me. Fast, easy and basically full featured and maybe most important...easy to see! I didn't realize other companies were not up to speed on this.
-
I suspect that the real reason that we don't see many Android apps is that the SDK agreement that Apple has with these major audio companies requires them to sign a non-compete clause which prevents them from developing for Android.
Android tablets are rare in our industry because no one write any software for them.
Worldwide, there are many, many more times Android devices in use as there are Apple products.
There is nothing in the SDK agreement that prevents a developer from making software available on multiple platforms. The development tools for each platform are different, so they essentially would be 2 separate projects, usually created by different teams that have the expertise in each platform.
While the gross volume of shipped Android devices are higher, a large volume of those devices are the cheap, garbage, sub $100 stuff that would simply never work properly. Many of these are throw away devices that last less than a year. When you narrow down the number of tablets that have fast and reliable enough resources, the actual quantities in the field lean heavily towards the iPad.
If you look at other items, companies such as Crown don't make mac software. They decided that writing a PC version of the software was enough. It sucks having to run Windows just for that purpose, but they figured that the resources of writing a mac software wouldn't increase sales enough to be worth the effort. So, I use the tool needed to get the job done.
-
If you look at other items, companies such as Crown don't make mac software. They decided that writing a PC version of the software was enough. It sucks having to run Windows just for that purpose, but they figured that the resources of writing a mac software wouldn't increase sales enough to be worth the effort. So, I use the tool needed to get the job done.
I prefer working on Windows based PCs. I use Protools on a PC. And of all the software that I use in production, the only piece of software that is Mac only is QLab. Everything else that I use either runs on Windows only or is cross platform compatible.
The only reason I have an iPad is because the Yamaha Stage Mix apps are iPad only. If they offered an Android version, I would use that instead.
-
I chose a Nexus tablet. My reasoning was that it's a Google product and will always be updated and be the first to be updated. There's tons of Android tablets out there running an older OS which will probably never see an update. Even Samsung seems to be slow on this.
Android apps are constantly being updated. My X32 Mixing station seems to be updated every few months and it's always run solidly on my Nexus.
-
...And the X32/M32/X-Air app on Android is far superior to the one on iOS. All of my employees use it on whatever phone and tablet they have and it works great. In the lighting world ETC has a remote app for Android that works great. I'm with the no excuses camp here...
-
...And the X32/M32/X-Air app on Android is far superior to the one on iOS. All of my employees use it on whatever phone and tablet they have and it works great. In the lighting world ETC has a remote app for Android that works great. I'm with the no excuses camp here...
Yeah, but doesn't ETC app cost like $50?
-
I chose a Nexus tablet. My reasoning was that it's a Google product and will always be updated and be the first to be updated. There's tons of Android tablets out there running an older OS which will probably never see an update. Even Samsung seems to be slow on this.
Android apps are constantly being updated. My X32 Mixing station seems to be updated every few months and it's always run solidly on my Nexus.
My precise reasoning and experience as well. The Nexus 7 is great for walk around the venue gigs and now I'm looking seriously at the Nexus 10 as well for those times when I have a more stationary mix position.
-
...And the X32/M32/X-Air app on Android is far superior to the one on iOS.
That sir may be the understatement of the year! I watched the Mixing Station demo and immediately went out and got an android tablet even though I already owned an iPhone/pad and MacBook Pro. A few months ago I took the time to more fully explore some of the new features (feedback detection/extensively customizable layers/virtual DCAs/arranging buttons of one's choice around the borders) and realized that the set/largely-static workflow of the physical console surface was obsolete (for my level of production anyway) and immediately sold my X32 Compact and bought a second X32 Rack. Now to top all of that off David has built a version of Mixing Station to run against the QU series mixers which, while a substantial step below the X32 in overall capabilities (apologies to A&H fan-folks), is what my normal venue has installed so i can at least have an interface that I'm used to and thereby somewhat make up for the workflow limitations of the QU.
..dave
-
+1. this i have found to be a fantastic approach. I believe harman bought the company that first did it and they are now the soundcraft Ui series.
This is practical because the application resides within the device as a function of the device OS. The browser is only responsible for screen updates and keystrokes. This is the common method for control and administration of large scale storage, routers, servers, etc. where there is almost unlimited horsepower and memory available to support the processes. You also need to keep in mind that although you control the application using HTML functions, not all browsers and add on's are created equally. I bought a UI 16 for a specific purpose and am very happy with the interface, but I'm not fooled into thinking there aren't limitations with it as well.
Personally I'll stay with my Ipad for remote control functions. They're cheap enough, and I know the interface/app will work. Besides, I don't mix with the Ipad or app, I mix with the board.
-
Yeah, but doesn't ETC app cost like $50?
Yup. And the money is donated to Behind the Scenes. And its 1% the cost of a proper RFU.
I don't think I'm the only one who would pay for remote apps as long as you know that going into it. The labor saved from having it pays for itself in most instances.
If Midas came out and said Mixtender was going to cost a hundred bucks but we are going to put a developer on it full time I would buy it in a heartbeat. The fact it took 2 years to get GAIN on the Mixtender app is totally nuts.
The lighting world has been paying for hardware remotes since 90's. They were (and still are) freakishly expensive. I don't think any of us would scoff at paying for a great app that helps us make money easier and faster. Lets be real here, being able to walk a space and make edits and being able to stand behind an artists wedge and get it rung out is a real game changer for our industry. Who wouldn't be willing to pay for that?
David has a half million downloads of the X32 app. His donation app has 5000 purchases. There is a market here.
-
Think about it this way. If David writes an app, and that app has a bug in it that causes a mixer to go bork mid show, the manufacturer can say it was a problem with the third party app. If it was their app and their console, now they take the brunt of the failure.
Yes, writing apps can be done, but making sure that app won't cause a meltdown of the system in some unforeseen scenario requires far more resources to accomplish. There have to be many more checks assurances in place before a manufacturer can put their name on a product in the wild. The risk to their reputation has a much higher value than someone that is developing on their own.
Some interesting points, but.....the exact opposite has happened.
Behringer's latest release of the app introduced a number of defects, one of which people are up in arms about (mute indicators not working properly). I myself am very displeased with the defects that Behringer release (they borked their own app). This was 4 MONTHS AGO....no fix, and almost no response from Behringer as to when it will be fixed. Users have requested the prior (working) version be released back on the app store.....Behringer has not done so.
David's app however, has all those features (that Behringer borked) working properly.
So this is Behringer's failure....and they are taking the brunt of nothing.
Back on point - all of these Manufactures should be hiring David to write their Android app. Or he should do it solo and charge for them.
I gladly paid for Mix Station because it works, and I have faith that David will keep it running properly. Behringer I have no faith in.
-
Android tablets, being as random as they are, with many different hardware sets and software versions require vastly more resources for proper development, yet, represent a sliver of the market. It doesn't make financial sense to dedicate resources there.
Assuming they don't just go the web browser route like a few manufacturers, I think a lot of people would be happy with "We support tablets A/B and phones C/D, anything else you are on your own if it fails". Or even just having a well documented API that third parties can interact with.
-
...And the X32/M32/X-Air app on Android is far superior to the one on iOS.
When Midas went digital with the XL88 they used Linux as the base OS, so the Android OS (which comes from the same heritage) was probably the easiest tablet platform for them to develop on.
-
When Midas went digital with the XL88 they used Linux as the base OS, so the Android OS (which comes from the same heritage) was probably the easiest tablet platform for them to develop on.
Midas does not have an Android App for the Pro Series/XL8... just an iOS app. The X32 app was not developed by midas/music group/behringer... it was developed by a 18 year old kid who didn't even own an X32.
-
When Midas went digital with the XL88 they used Linux as the base OS, so the Android OS (which comes from the same heritage) was probably the easiest tablet platform for them to develop on.
Midas does not have an Android App for the Pro Series/XL88... just an iOS app. The X32 app was not developed by midas/music group/behringer... it was developed by a 18 year old kid who didn't even own an X32.
No one has an app, Android or otherwise for the Midas XL-88 (http://www.gemco.de/uploads/tx_gemcoverleih/datasheet_midas_xl88_eng.pdf), it's an analog mixer.
Mac
-
Or even just having a well documented API that third parties can interact with.
I believe this right here is the real ticket, and why David could make his excellent app in the first place: the (admittedly unofficial) documentation for the X32's Open Sound Control interface runs to over 80 pages, allowing you to control basically every single function of the mixer over its network connection. He did an app for an A&H console next because it also has a fairly decent remote control protocol (although, to my knowledge, not nearly as comprehensive as the X32's).
If every console manufacturer put this kind of open API in place for their digital consoles (whether Open Sound Control, MIDI over RTP, heck, even Telnet) then the discussion about what platforms their control software or apps support would become pretty moot, since anyone could write their own control software for their platform of choice (or pay David to do it for them).
-Russ
-
with creating an API, you're back to engineering resources. The teams that developed these apps may not have done this in a way that lends itself to just opening up the API to other developers. Console manufacturers may not want to have everyone and their brother able to make an app for their console, because if it's a shitty app, it makes the console manufacturer look bad. Our company chose not to spend the engineering resources on an API because there's so much to fix in the current versions as well as new features we are looking to add, and now have to ensure they update on iOS, Android and Kindle. Start adding multi-language support and it's a lot of work.
So for manufacturers, if you have just one OS supported, think long and hard before adding another. Even having an API for others to do it for you is more work than just sticking to one.
-
Console manufacturers may not want to have everyone and their brother able to make an app for their console, because if it's a shitty app, it makes the console manufacturer look bad.
I'm not sure I understand this train of thought. Console are tools, and, like any other tools, the results they produce are only as good as the systems they're used with and the people they're used by. You're not going to blame the console manufacturer if, for example, one of your wireless microphones fails mid-show. Similarly, I don't believe many people are likely to blame Behringer if David's app were to fail mid-show (not that this is likely; it is a very good app).
A well-built API would encourage good programmers to write good control software, and would hopefully prevent total catastrophe if a shitty app shits itself. I'd much rather have a tool that I can use with the other tools I already own, even if that means sometimes things shit themselves (as an example, I think most of us would be very wary of buying a console that only worked with certain "trusted" brands of microphone).
-Russ
-
I'm not sure I understand this train of thought. Console are tools, and, like any other tools, the results they produce are only as good as the systems they're used with and the people they're used by. You're not going to blame the console manufacturer if, for example, one of your wireless microphones fails mid-show. Similarly, I don't believe many people are likely to blame Behringer if David's app were to fail mid-show (not that this is likely; it is a very good app).
A well-built API would encourage good programmers to write good control software, and would hopefully prevent total catastrophe if a shitty app shits itself. I'd much rather have a tool that I can use with the other tools I already own, even if that means sometimes things shit themselves (as an example, I think most of us would be very wary of buying a console that only worked with certain "trusted" brands of microphone).
-Russ
To add to that.... Behringer figured this out. Behringer. Yes. Behringer. They are doing this right now. Whats the hold up here? What secret sauce do they have that no one else can crack?
-
A well-built API would encourage good programmers to write good control software, and would hopefully prevent total catastrophe if a shitty app shits itself. I'd much rather have a tool that I can use with the other tools I already own, even if that means sometimes things shit themselves (as an example, I think most of us would be very wary of buying a console that only worked with certain "trusted" brands of microphone).
-Russ
A well-built API takes a lot of time to develop and support, which again takes away resources from the current dev team, which may be one person. And time spent developing and supporting the API means features and bugs aren't fixed for the existing users. For me, I'm happy Mackie is avoiding supporting Android, Microsoft Surface, Blackberry, Chromebooks, etc. and not spending the time building and supporting an API. Hats off to Behringer for including an API on theirs, and hopefully their apps were designed with the thought of having an API available during development.
I doubt anyone buying a console over $5K worries that it only works with an iPad. Even if they're Android only phone people, they can buy a dedicated iPad for the console for $399.
-
A well-built API takes a lot of time to develop and support, which again takes away resources from the current dev team, which may be one person. And time spent developing and supporting the API means features and bugs aren't fixed for the existing users. For me, I'm happy Mackie is avoiding supporting Android, Microsoft Surface, Blackberry, Chromebooks, etc. and not spending the time building and supporting an API. Hats off to Behringer for including an API on theirs, and hopefully their apps were designed with the thought of having an API available during development.
I doubt anyone buying a console over $5K worries that it only works with an iPad. Even if they're Android only phone people, they can buy a dedicated iPad for the console for $399.
Different strokes for different folks.....I sold my Mackie for that reason.
At NAMM I asked about future App support. They said no Android support. I think that's way short sighted.
Also they said there would be no way to ever connect a laptop (or hardwire any computing device) to their DL series.
I said - well right now at least you can dock an iPad in the DL1608.
He said - yeah, we may eliminate that in the future. (that was the point that I felt he pulled the gun out of his holster and shot it right in his foot).
I said - what if your router dies during a show?
Mackie Rep - you should have a back up router.
I said - sure, and I do....but it's pretty hard to swap the router out when I'm playing guitar and singing.
Mackie Rep - yeah I guess that's a problem.
Not bashing Mackie here....just making the point that all manufactures should be considering as many connectivity options as their team can support.
-
Jay - and you hit the nail on the head. If Mackie's team is small, iOS is the only OS they can support. As I mentioned earlier, this is not the same as porting a software only app. Connecting to devices over WiFi or Bluetooth is complicated. Android makes it painful because they don't enforce a standard for chipsets, software, etc. so that each manufacturer is slightly different. So think of it as supporting iOS, and then Samsung Android, Nexus Android, Kindle Fire Android (forked version) and then trying to understand why a crap HTC Android tablet doesn't work. With iPad and iPhone, it works on all the same devices with one software version, no patching. For a small team, just doing iOS support is big. Adding Android gets really difficult.
As to the rep saying they may remove the dock, you should be happy - right now the dock only works because Apple has the same lightning location for all iPads. For Android, it's wherever the hell the manufacturer feels like placing it, which may not be the same even for the same manufacturer.
So before you call them shortsighted, as someone who's lived with a small company making app-enabled robots that decided to do both Android and iOS, it was a terrible mistake. Android is a PITA to work on with connected devices, and the amount of sales show that 87% of our users are on iOS. Yet we continue to pour resources into Android support. We would have been better off sticking with iOS only until the apps were completely stable, and we wouldn't have lost any real sales dollars.
-
I said - what if your router dies during a show?
Mackie Rep - you should have a back up router.
I said - sure, and I do....but it's pretty hard to swap the router out when I'm playing guitar and singing.
Mackie Rep - yeah I guess that's a problem.
What if ANY piece of gear dies during the show. The odds of a router dying mid-show are slim to none if you have a decent quality one to start with. Now, if you go with a cheap $29 model, then all bets are off, but at that point, cost is more important to you than reliability.
-
Jay - and you hit the nail on the head. If Mackie's team is small, iOS is the only OS they can support. As I mentioned earlier, this is not the same as porting a software only app. Connecting to devices over WiFi or Bluetooth is complicated. Android makes it painful because they don't enforce a standard for chipsets, software, etc. so that each manufacturer is slightly different. So think of it as supporting iOS, and then Samsung Android, Nexus Android, Kindle Fire Android (forked version) and then trying to understand why a crap HTC Android tablet doesn't work. With iPad and iPhone, it works on all the same devices with one software version, no patching. For a small team, just doing iOS support is big. Adding Android gets really difficult.
As to the rep saying they may remove the dock, you should be happy - right now the dock only works because Apple has the same lightning location for all iPads. For Android, it's wherever the hell the manufacturer feels like placing it, which may not be the same even for the same manufacturer.
So before you call them shortsighted, as someone who's lived with a small company making app-enabled robots that decided to do both Android and iOS, it was a terrible mistake. Android is a PITA to work on with connected devices, and the amount of sales show that 87% of our users are on iOS. Yet we continue to pour resources into Android support. We would have been better off sticking with iOS only until the apps were completely stable, and we wouldn't have lost any real sales dollars.
As someone who is an IT product owner supporting both iOS and android platforms, I don't agree that it is hard to support. But that's a matter of my employer making a decision to staff with the appropriate skilled team members.
-
What if ANY piece of gear dies during the show. The odds of a router dying mid-show are slim to none if you have a decent quality one to start with. Now, if you go with a cheap $29 model, then all bets are off, but at that point, cost is more important to you than reliability.
Agreed, any piece can malfunction. And I also agree you get what you pay for with a router.
But as a manufacturer, removing the ability to have a fail safe, is not an improvement in my opinion...I feel it's a step backwards.
If mackie wants to remove the dock connection because ipad standards may change...then offer a USB or Ethernet port to hardwire into.
I know these features are all a matter of personal preference....just sharing mine.
Technology is exploding....you need to be innovative or someone else surely will be.
-
The odds of a router dying mid-show are slim to none if you have a decent quality one to start with.
Having a spare wall-wart seems reasonable.
-
Agreed, any piece can malfunction. And I also agree you get what you pay for with a router.
But as a manufacturer, removing the ability to have a fail safe, is not an improvement in my opinion...I feel it's a step backwards.
If mackie wants to remove the dock connection because ipad standards may change...then offer a USB or Ethernet port to hardwire into.
I know these features are all a matter of personal preference....just sharing mine.
Technology is exploding....you need to be innovative or someone else surely will be.
That is why I really like the X-Air "consoles". Bought one for our lobby PA. All my guys can run it off whatever phone they have in their pocket. If they want to grab one of our iPads they can do that too. If they want to run off a PC hard wired to it they can do that. They really can do whatever you want. I was never a fan of the "sleds" but offering a USB or ethernet port is the way to go.
-
I said - what if your router dies during a show?
Mackie Rep - you should have a back up router.
I said - sure, and I do....but it's pretty hard to swap the router out when I'm playing guitar and singing.
Mackie Rep - yeah I guess that's a problem.
Not bashing Mackie here....just making the point that all manufactures should be considering as many connectivity options as their team can support.
Having a pair of ethernet connectors rather than one would probably be a better alternative than being dependent on whatever Apple's current proprietary connector is. Cheap people can use one port and a cheap router. Beginners who actually care can use a pair of routers with separate SSID's and just switch networks if one cuts out.
-
Having a pair of ethernet connectors rather than one would probably be a better alternative than being dependent on whatever Apple's current proprietary connector is. Cheap people can use one port and a cheap router. Beginners who actually care can use a pair of routers with separate SSID's and just switch networks if one cuts out.
We are talking about an entry level mixer here. Creating redundant wireless networks is not something the vast majority of customers are going to be doing. The cost to build dual ethernet jacks into a design wouldn't be trivial, especially for the extremely narrow subset of clients that may decide to use it.
-
We are talking about an entry level mixer here. Creating redundant wireless networks is not something the vast majority of customers are going to be doing. The cost to build dual ethernet jacks into a design wouldn't be trivial, especially for the extremely narrow subset of clients that may decide to use it.
I agree, but I doubt the cost of apple's licensing for their current setup is cheap either. Unless they have changed their policies on 'accessories'