VJair wrote:ways to decrease the load time / work around:
use an ssd drive
Fisrt of all:
Let-me just said to yall that i will try with an ssd drive.
Second of all:
I did'nt wanted to had to said this but you give me NO CHOICE.
IT IS RIDICULOUS that i get such answers like this. as i recall i'v paid 300 euros for this piece of software that is giving me more troubles than anything else till today.
I should n had to PAID extra money for an EXTRA HD, let me just ask you all a question:
what if SSD technology did'n existed?
what if HDD at 10.000 did'n existed?
what would be than the answer then? sorry mate, sh*** happens, would this be the kind of answer?
seriously, let me just past here what i took from resolume website:
Minimum system requirements
PC: ATI Radeon 9600 or later. NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 or later. 1GB RAM.
Mac: Intel processor. Quartz Extreme graphics card (Resolume Avenue is not compatible with integrated Intel graphics processors). 1GB RAM
Does it said anywhere here that i need an SSD drive? NO!!!
Third:
I bought a GREAT machine to run this I'v paid over than 2500euros to have a top of the range mac just to run resolume, i'v paid 300 euros for the new version isn't that enough? IT IS SIMPLY NOT FAIR No!!! it's seems that i had to get an SSD drive well in that case why don't you put in the official info that specification?????
I mean, for crying out loud what will i need in the future for the resolume 4 to run???? a silicon graphics media server???? a bundle of 10 pcs with at least 10 GPU each one in parallel processing? a billion SSD drives just to load my content?
honestly I know that an ssd drive is ok, is fast, is powerful etc etc etc, but the choice OF BUYING ONE shoulder me mine, not like (it's becoming clear to me now) an obligation, just for the software to be responsive like it should'v been in the first place WITHOUT an ssd drive.
I mean, like many people here i have the pre requirements.
I have a top of the range MAC 2010, i'v paid extra money for an HD of 7500rpm's i have internal HD space to practically store the whole world in there, i have 2 graphic cards running, i'v spend 3 months converting all my videos to DXV, i even make a clean OS install, now what? are you telling me that i need an ssd drive? for what? someone else here in this forum has an ssd drive and you know what he said? that even with an ssd drive he is still struggling with decks loading and laggy interface, did you know that?
do you want more? i can give you more, right here in my own town, just in my work place a colleague of mine has exactly the same problem, he has an SSD intel x25 connected trough firewire and still the deck loading is a lil bit faster but still very slow to the needs of deck loading in a glips of an eye.
and then there is the question, ok, he can put an internal ssd drive for that extra speed that esata gives, but what about the 500GB disk-space? that he currently has? ho bla bla bla he can still use it as an external drive and so on, but i raise the question: are you all familiar with the concept of "laptop computer" right? you know.. like a machine that is... portable!!! not to mention the costs of an ssd drive etc etc etc.
There are others softwares like Modul8 for example, that runs perfectly fine on a mac, that loads library perfectly fine on mac, that even runs all kinds of mov codecs without any problems on a mac, why in this resolume3 everything must be so complicated, so full of restrains so full of additional hardware???????? i mean, not even in a great pc like mine it's doing his job correctly.
VJair wrote:
don't try and load so many files at a time
VJair hello? why do you think that I suggested precisely to at least under preferences had the option to enable or disable the deck loading during startup?
and why do you think that for me like many other people is so important to have the deck list arranged alphabetically? that is precisely to split the content over more and more decks, but if they aren't organized by some order or coherent criteria i will loose ages just to find what I want, it is simply not possible.
you see, this is a perfect example of the importance to res3 had a better "navigation"/"Management" policy under decks couse i believe that this 3 suggestions that i'v made were a better improvement because not so many decks needed to be "loaded" probably (and here i'm talking without know cause) the switching of decks would be faster and the laggy interface could'ed be also faster because resolume didn't had all the decks loaded giving free space for the system to respond much faster to other requests.
Really can someone from resolume headquarters like edwin or bart give their thoughts about this?
Take care,
Sync