I work as a cross-platform developer, so maybe my own experiences (Frustrations at times) with working on MacOS is coming across. My friend, you seem insistent to put a negative spin on everything. Although we are very used with the workflow is not such a big step to do a change to another daw, specially when Cubase has already a big minus for all the Laptop users, by using the dongle. ![]() Steinberg should know that the majority of the users are long time users and we need to be keep happy because we are seeing 40 ads a day with companies that claiming that they’re DAW is the very best in the world and a game changer. ![]() Cubase should had a patch update after maximum 1 week after release, not for Rosetta, but for all the graphical problems found and well known on all the platforms. I am 100% sure that they are working on that, but I am sorry to say: “they are late”. The frustration comes for the fact that Cubase 11 does not work under Rosetta 2 while all other daws that I’ve tested (but I don’t like) work perfectly. If Steinberg launches the native version of cubase tomorrow I won’t use it anyway because I still have plugins that are not native and will probably not work under the native version of Cubase. But i think what Apple are doing for computing with the invention of Silicon is a genuine improvement and feels a good progression… We’re just in that egg breaking stage of making an omlette! The whole path of being a third party developer for Apple is going to be challenging in the coming years. They may not even know anything beyond M1 as yet.įurther to this though, somewhere down the line they (Apple) will no doubt want to force companies like Steinberg through the App Store pathway too, at which point, once established they could start refusing future submissions if you’re not supporting Audio Units (For example). This is why i see it being a long way off, i can understand if there is hesitancy there at this point - as a developer i’d really like to know what’s around the corner when committing support to new architecture. ![]() However, we all know that Apple will change the rules again this year with a new MacOS and the changes developers will need to undertake as a result.Īlso the next level of Apple silicon hardware will be announced and released - this all needs to be accounted for within the Apple Silicon implementation. I guess the main blessing is that they can run the M1 binary in parallel with the current builds, so it should be something that is offered as a beta in the early stages for M1 owners, and if the Rosetta layer is running C11 ok they are supported along both pathways then. No doubt, and i really hope you’re right. I strongly suspect (guess) that support for M1 is near the top of the priority list for the development team way above closing out bugs / new licensing system / new features for C11.5, but bear in mind those will very likely be different teams.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |