Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
At 2:18 -0200 11/9/99, Matthias Grob wrote: >>Do the other Macintosh music software developers who incorporated OMS >>support into their applications deserve to be left in the dark about >>OMS's future now that Opcode clearly can no longer maintain it? > > I understood that OMS is Apples now and called Open Music System (as >oposed > to Opcode MS) - I may be wrong This is not true. Gbison has rebuffed all initiatives to find new homes for any of Opcode's intellectual property. I heard this from a very reliable source just three days ago. It would be very logical for Apple to take over OMS, or to coordinate its replacement, since OMS benefits no one company and is a shared resource. It is also a logical candidate for open sourcing. It was renamed from Opcode to Open Music System by Opcode a long time ago. > I am mainly concerned about MAX which is a unique product with great >future > (maybe not comercially, but for creativity). I hope someone takes that >over. Max isn't such a big problem; I think Opcode only had publishing rights, but no ownership of the code. > If I were one of the remaining Sequencer soft enterprises, I would >create a > Vision2xx converter and a decent offer to catch the Vision users... That would be very sensible, but the file format is not public and is not easy to reverse engineer. Doug -- Doug Wyatt doug@sonosphere.com http://www.sonosphere.com/