MAJOR IMPROVEMENT

[William Fleming]

One major improvement (that is too much to ask) that I think would make Sonar (or any other DAW) run more stable.

I work as a tech on commercial communications system. One thing I work on is installing/servicing drive throu systems at fast food restaurants, which include timers at fast food restaurants that time how long it takes at the menu, to take orders, pickup window, overall, and well as other things.

The apps for these systems run on an OS (typically Windows) and are prone to crashes once in a while. 

One system in particular has its own priority OS, which is integrated with the app and runs much more stable. When I go out to service them, it is usually bad wiring, network issue, etc., and rarely goes down because of the OS. In fact, if it has to do with the system, it's because the tech did not input the right configuration during installation (Store info, network info, configuration, etc.), or the site wants a different configuration, which an inhouse tech can take care of because the system is on a cloud. 

Because the software is its "own" OS, it runs very stable. And one of the biggest issues that make it a better system: NO NEED FOR ANTI-VIRUS! Which we all know takes a LOT of memory and CPU. Their computers run on only 4 Gigs of memory! (And do it well I might add)

The system should still be online to do updates to Sonar (OS), plugins that need online service, etc., as well as COMMUNICATING WITH OTHERS. Wouldn't that be great?

Many of us have (can afford) more than one computer, so having a dedicated one for a DAW is not an issue. Although, having a dual boot system is not out of the question either. It may even need only 4 gigs of memory for Sonar's system!

But of course, I understand that it is too much to be asking.......   😢. 

 But then again, if this other company (that does not manufacture the computer, just uses "off the shelve" PCs) can make its own app that is "built" on an OS......   

Just a suggestion.

 

[pwalpwal]

5 minutes ago, William Fleming said:

But of course, I understand that it is too much to be asking

imagine the cost!

[William Fleming]

 

One thing I forgot to mention: The OS would have to utilize the same driver as used by Windows. Soundcard, controllers, exc. Infact, it would be really nice if Bandlab could write an OS that could utilize multiple ASIOs.

And as far as creating an OS, we all know that others besides Microsoft have made Window versions. I use Windows Tiny on my PC. It doesn't have all the extras that I don't need.

Just a dream.....

 

[William Fleming]

Hey, Pwalpwal, 

Thanks for checking out my post so quickly!

As far as cost concerns, check out my last post. Windows tiny is free! There are many other OSs out there (Liniux) that are free as well.

But even if it cost a bit, compared to other DAWs that are out there, which cost in the hundreds, and still need an expensive OS to run! (That make them unstable). And Sonar is great competition to any of them!

The team at Bandlab do a LOT of work to create/update this complex software they come out with to give it away for free. And being Sonar is pretty complex to have written, how much harder for this experience team is it to write an OS? It seems versions of Linux are written in people's bedroom. And a version of Sonar with it's own OS should be even easier to write, being it would need less in it. 

Why not keep the free version of Sonar for people to run on Windows (like with Cakewalk) and have a version that cost with its own OS system?

Just like Pro Tool is doing right now, only without it's own OS system. Again, less stable.

I wouldn't mind paying for it. Especially if it were more stable, AND POWERFUL, because of its own OS (like the one I mentioned about in the drive thru system) without all the unnecessary things (like Anti-virus) on it.

And needing less memory to do it! (saving money to pay toward a different version of Sonar)

 

Just a dream.....

 

 

[pwalpwal]

16 hours ago, William Fleming said:

how much harder for this experience team is it to write an OS?

very much harder

16 hours ago, William Fleming said:

It seems versions of Linux are written in people's bedroom

hundreds, thousands of people's bedrooms the cake team is rather small in comparison, and ms don't allow this sort of thing

i think your best option is finding a linux version optimised for daw work, i believe ubuntu has a version or debian is also an option, but you don't get all the plugins etc

/goodluck

[William Fleming]

 

"hundreds, thousands of people's bedrooms  the cake team is rather small in comparison, and ms don't allow this sort of thing"

Exactly! 

There are LOTS of AVERAGE people who write OS. Not just Linux, but you can find others writing Windows version (I use Tiny), so MS does allow licensing.  We're not talking about Harvard graduates either. Just as "backyard" mechanics build their own car from scratch, based on manufactured parts (Ford frame, Chevy engine, etc) and put together an original vehicle, there have been "backyard" software developers who have created their own OS.

As far as small, the company I pointed out (HME) is a small company compared to Microsoft, Apple, etc., but has written their own OS for drive thru timer systems. This company's main gold is to make hardware to do the job (headsets, vehicle detectors, etc.), not software. Their software team is probably no bigger (if not smaller) then what Cakewalk has.

As far as using Linux, that would be the same as using Windows. It is a general OS build for installing software on top of it. It is bogged down with other things that are not needed to run a dedicated DAW system. One of the Antimalware, something the priority OS this drive thru company uses does not need. 

And as I pointed out, other company with drive through timers will use standard OS (usually Windows) and I have to run out to service them, where the one with its own priority system never seems to fail. An OS that need less power (2G memory) and runs more stable that the one that need Windows on a more powerful PC.

They are not the only ones either. There are surveillance companies, automatic machine controllers, etc., that utilize OS written on standard PC base equipment.

So, if these small companies can write stable an OS, then why can't small DAW companies write one?

Think about it, a dual boot PC that has Windows and a dedicated DAW OS (that doesn't have all the unnecessaries needed for a DAW, i.e. Antivirus).  It would just need to be able to load and use drivers (soundcard) and utilize plugins.

Just like some people have a dual boot with Windows and a version of Linux. 

 

[Jim Roseberry]

Not at all practical.  The niche market would be so minute... there'd be no profit in the man-hours to create/produce/maintain it.   Same goes for Linux based DAWs.

That OS would have to support 3rd-party plugins... or you'd be taking a 30-year step backward in time. 

One benefit of Windows is the massive economy of scale.  Remember back in the early days of PCs... where an IBM machine was literally $10k.  Adjusted for today's economy, the cost would be almost $29k.

If you want the equivalent of a dedicated hardware recorder, Tascam makes a 24-track recording box.  It's a completely "closed" system.

 

FWIW, The machines I'm running are in no way unstable, unpredictable, or poor-performers.

One can build a fast, robust Windows PC DAW.  That has been my career for the past 30+ years.