On 14 Sep 2006 at 0:02, A-NO-NE Music wrote: > David W. Fenton / 2006/09/13 / 08:30 PM wrote: > > >Would a driver written for the PowerPC version of OS X work if run on > > a MacIntel? Can drivers work on top of the compatibility layer > >(whose name I've forgotten)? > > > >Would a driver written for Mac OS9 work on the current version of OS > >X? > > You are joking, right?
Of course not. I'm responding to your statement: > Since Mac peripherals are much more controlled, this kind of driver > problem won't happen on Mac. And, apparently, I've provided an example of exactly the kind of situation where what you've stated is not true. > My point was what supported will work as > advertised on Mac. If it doesn't work, the vender have to fix it, > because the environment variables are far more controlled by Apple. > When a driver doesn't work because of Apple bug, which we have seen on > CA and OpenGL, Apple provides the workaround to the vendor. I know > this because I do quite a few DSP beta testing and I am also a larking > member of ADC. The issue in question was a hardware device that was old enough to not have a driver that worked on WinXP, because it was designed for Win98. This is for two reasons: 1. it was common for consumer-targeted hardware to have Win9x drivers and no WinNT drivers). 2. also, in the WinME/Win2K time frame (and the very, very last OEM releases of Win98), there was a change in the Windows driver model that made some older drivers incompatible. How this is different from OS9 vs. OS X and PowerPC vs. MacIntel, I can't say, but you seem to think that it is. > My Dell Dimension P-III 1GHz which was originally released with Win2K > is still running great with my Win2KSP4, and I get no VxD error nor > BSD error whatsoever. > > These two soft samplers I mentioned had been working fine until the > latest update. The programmer claims the video driver for my video > card, which is onboard, must be too dated. I don't understand what dependencies a soft sampler would have on the video drivers. > The real problem is that > the older version no longer runs even after I cleared all the registry > because the installer altered the shared lib (another thing to > complain about Windows that doesn't happen on Mac). The *software* installer replaced a Windows component? Er, um, you're blaming *that* on Windows, and not on stupid decisions on the part of the software designer? > My only way out > at this point is to restore C: image. Instead, I ditched the > products. Assuming you mean the soft synth, it's the right thing to do, as they are to blame for it no longer being supported, because of their bad original design. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
