XP lacking Mac Midi Functionality???

[Jonny Jones]

Nikki
Having moaned, your post was otherwise very informative!
Thanks

[nikki-k]

Hi!
It isnt a matter of dont know- it is a matter of from the horses mouth- taken from the MOTU site, link and quoted section:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Related Links
FreeMIDI Tech Notes
Download FreeMIDI


FreeMIDI is a complete MIDI operating system for the Macintosh OS 9. It ships free of charge and is automatically installed with all Mark of the Unicorn music software products.
FreeMIDI automatically detects what type of MIDI interface is connected to the Macintosh serial or USB ports, automatically detects what MIDI devices are connected to interface (it "knows" over 200 types of devices), and provides a graphical representation of their MIDI studio.

FreeMIDI also provides pop-up sound lists for over 100 popular MIDI synthesizers-as well as generic support for any General MIDI device. It even includes advanced features such as inter-application communication, multiple application real-time synchronization, and support for Digidesign's Sample Cell Nubus card.


FreeMIDI link- MOTU

On top of that, why not go to OPCODE's site, once again, the horses mouth, and let's see what they have:
OMS - Opcode page (horses mouth)
Gee- I dont see a Windows OS download- does anyone else???

While FreeMIDI and OMS have been part of applications written by both companies that run on Windows OS's, neither was available "solo" for integration into the Windows OS as it was for Mac OS that I know of. If someone has any link to downloadable stand-alone fully integrated version(s) of either that work the same as on Mac, I would love to see it.

If you check out the Microsoft developer's sections, you will see that MIDI capabilities DO exist! It is simply up to the software app developer to "access" them. I think...I may be wrong on this one Emagic and Steinberg are two notables that have patch and device naming, yet do not utilize the "native" Windows code for doing this. Cakewalk is the one company that seems to like sticking close to the Windows OS coding for doing alot of their stuff, hence the DX/DXi stuff. Sonic FOundry used to be the same, but seems to have slipped toward being VST.

I am not claiming to "know all" on this, just did a bunch of "research" trying to find a work around. I even went so far as to try and find a way, either thru registry or hacking dll's/drivers to find a way to even "hack" a way to make a non-dynamic way of even naming one's own devices. While it wouldn't solve patch naming/importing, I would at least be able to see my "permamnent" installations of things like HUI, main keyboard controller, etc names, rather than seeing "XXX Port 1," "XXX Port 2," etc.

FreeMMIDI and OMS running on Windows WITHIN a parent application is not the same as the FreeMIDI and OMS code running solo dual platform. Just as they use them WITHIN those applications, so do Emagic and Steinberg (and others) do so with their own "form" of dealing with midi devices and patches.

Which brings me back to what I was saying in the first place: If Mac user's have something already, and there is not an equivalent for/on Windows OS, we DONT get it. The converse is true, save for the exception I noted of WMA export, recently added with 6.1.x.

Is there a possibilty that Digi could utilize OMS or FreeMIDI to do this for Win OS? Yes. BUT- they would have to do the integration of it, whereas with Mac, it has the ability to run "solo." In other words, DIgi did not have to code the integration, as both existed solo natively. With the advent of Core Midi, OMS support is GONE now, so even if someone got wither to fly solo on WIn OS, DIgi is now past OMS use, and therefore we would still be SOOL.

The link to the pdf you provided is great- IF you are using Vision on Windows. Notice it says the document is, "..somewhat Vision-specific..." As such, it is simply referring to the Windows version of Vision in respect to how OMS naming works, and NOT to how OMS works "solo" with Windows OS.

Fun link:
notice it says MAC

I have contacted Opcode for a definitive answer, and will share it as soon as (if) I get a reply.
Previously, Opcode acquired Music Quest, and bringing OMS to Windows was one intention with this. This is going back about 6-8 years, so I may be off a little At that point, Opcode was working with Microsoft to get OMS incorporated into Windows 98 (not called 98 at that time, as it had not been released). Gibson acquired Opcode, Microsoft decided to create their own version of handling audio and midi, and thus ended that little trist. Like I said, I may be cmpletely wrong, but having been around this stuff since about '91, that is what I remnember. I started with Cubase for Windows, ver 1, and Cakewalk. I remember when TB Quad came out! Woohoo! 4 track recording on your PC!!! I still have a Maui- yeah, the PC answer to samplecell.

[Jonny Jones]

Nikki thanks again for your input.
I never claimed that Freemidi or OMS could run solo, my point was that these 'utilities' can function within windows and it's therefore disappointing that digi did not 'bundle' them or something similar with PT LE for Windows. OMS, I understand was used prior to OSX and COREMIDI on Mac so I can't understand why they did not work at including it for Windows in the past- maybe I have been misled by the doc in the link and it doesn't work! Freemidi however, definately does 'cos I've used it in WIN98SE.
Your reply was an emphatic NO to the point raised that they can function in windows. I have used and am using Freemidi and despite the quotes it can still be downloaded for windows in the FREESTYLE demo from MOTU.
I appreciate you are trying to be helpful but there is a little arrogance about your posts that does not seem to brook disagreement. You emphatically denied Freemidi and OMS were able to work in windows applications (no mention was ever made of stand alone as, lets face it, these were designed to augment programmes).
I don't want to get sidetracked by an argument and you raise good points about developers needing to make the effort to utilise the facilities available within XP. So lets call a truce eh?
My main moan was digidesign being lazy. Once COREMIDI took over on OSX they could have cobbled something together for windows even if it was to use/licence/steal something like FREEMIDI
Take care
and thanksfor the debate!
Jonny

[nikki-k]

Hi!

Arrogance? Hehehehe! More like anger at the way Digi treats Win OS users.

FreeMIDI works with the app you are using in the same way that Steinberg uses their system to allow device and patch naming, and internal MIDI routing. Since OMS and FreeMIDI were able to run "solo" on Mac OS, ANY app could be written to use it. If Opcode or MOTU would port OMS or FreeMIDI over to run "solo" on Win OS, then we MIGHT have a shot at Digi adding these MIDI features for us. BUT- OMS is history with OS-X, so Digi isnt even coding for it for them anymore.

The reason OMS and FreeMIDI work WITHIN the apps you speak of is because MOTU and Opcode already had their code for the apps themselves using it, and rather than rewrite from ground up, they simply made a "bridge" between OMS and FreeMIDI and Win OS. COULD Digi have done the same and simply created a similar bridge between OMS and WIn OS? Yes. However, they didnt even have to do that for Mac, since OMS ran natively with Mac OS to start with.

Think of it this way: Pro Tools is car pulling up to a gas pump. Mac OS is the pump. OMS was the hose. Since the WinOS pumps used a different hose, Digi said screw it and went to the next pump, since they didnt want to "build a hose" to get gas from us. With Freestyle, MOTU basically took a hose they own, and made an adapter to use the WinOS pumps. The "FreeeMIDI" hose wont simply "plug-in" to the Win OS pumps. Digi has no reason to make an adapter of their own. Steinberg doesnt use OMS or FreeMIDI on WInOS, and they have device and patch naming, as well as routing, within their apps. Basically, Steinberg said- "Uhh- why do I want to make an adapter for someone else's hose when I can simply build my own hose?" Notice the only apps that used OMS and FreeMIDI on WIn were by the companies that made them in the first place. If Microsoft had incorporated OMS like Apple did, we would be fine. So we got sliced by MS first, and then Digi chose to not figure another way.

My wish would be that Digi gets in league with MIDI Quest, like others are doing, as it seems that they are now the sole "big league" survivors of the MIDI on Win OS war. If they dont do that, if they could AT LEAST allow us to rename patches (from the default numbers) and save those templates, that wuld be a HUGE step forward. They dont need any 3rd party crap for that! Renaming devices would be even easier. The only other way is to "hack" the drivers for MIDI interfaces, and change the code to reflect the name for the device you actually have hooked to each port. If I figure a way to do this, I will share it As far as I can tell, the drivers "tell" Windows the name to use for the ports, and then the app retrieves these names from there. I tried changing registry entries that associated those names, but that didnt work.If anyone knows how all of it works, please post it.

[Jonny Jones]

Nikki
Thanks- that was a good explanation. So it seems I'm stuffed then. It is only a small omission but it makes working with external synths sooooo much easier- I'm staggered that nothing has been done.
Thanks again for taking the time to post and explain it to me.
Jonny

[nikki-k]

Hi!
No problem.

Sorry if I was a bit pissy, really bad past few days. I should have exercised a bit of respect and avoided forum surfing-lol.

Anyone know if any white papers were even done on the midi side of PT? Prolly no reason for any, but figured I would ask Anyone have any good links on how Windows deals with MIDI? Tech stuff, driver interpretation and such?

[Cliffy_Boy]

nikki, when are you going to post pictures on your web site. In fact, when are you going to finish ( start?) it

[nikki-k]

Hi!
I just spent yesterday overhauling my site. I have thumbs up, and the entire "skeleton." There are a few sections that are a bit bare, like the links section. The forums remain the same tho Even have a nice "total freedom" section to say whatever ya want hehehe.