Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ProTools software not liking 10.3.5?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
February 4, 2005 5:35:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I've heard a nasty rumour that virtually every version of ProTools
after 6.0.1 does not like Mac system 10.3.5. Has anyone heard this and
have you had "real world" experience that would either support or
refute this? I have to reinstall Mac 6.1 and I want to make sure I am
not going to run into any snarls.

This all might be moot, however, as Digi suggests I run nothing later
than 10.2.8 for my setup (D24 and 2 dsp - non-MIX - farms) but I AM
curious as 10.3.5 is the first system that has proved trouble free for
me.

Thanks, Awe
Anonymous
February 4, 2005 8:51:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

What? I've got ProTools 6.4 running under 10.3.5 on ten LE stations and
three TDM stations. It's been like that since September. I've also got
6.4 running on 10.3.5 at home on an LE system. It's all been running
smoothly. What kind of "problems" exactly? The only issues we've had
have been with Norton Anti-Virus being on the same system (which we took
off).

6.1 and 6.2 are not authorized for 10.3.5 so it's a weird question.
Maybe that's where these rumors came from....somebody trying to run the
wrong version of software under the wrong OS.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

awespishus wrote:
> I've heard a nasty rumour that virtually every version of ProTools
> after 6.0.1 does not like Mac system 10.3.5. Has anyone heard this and
> have you had "real world" experience that would either support or
> refute this? I have to reinstall Mac 6.1 and I want to make sure I am
> not going to run into any snarls.
>
> This all might be moot, however, as Digi suggests I run nothing later
> than 10.2.8 for my setup (D24 and 2 dsp - non-MIX - farms) but I AM
> curious as 10.3.5 is the first system that has proved trouble free for
> me.
>
> Thanks, Awe
>
Anonymous
February 4, 2005 9:07:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 17:35:52 -0500, awespishus wrote
(in article <1107556552.062002.26380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>):

> I've heard a nasty rumour that virtually every version of ProTools
> after 6.0.1 does not like Mac system 10.3.5. Has anyone heard this and
> have you had "real world" experience that would either support or
> refute this? I have to reinstall Mac 6.1 and I want to make sure I am
> not going to run into any snarls.
>
> This all might be moot, however, as Digi suggests I run nothing later
> than 10.2.8 for my setup (D24 and 2 dsp - non-MIX - farms) but I AM
> curious as 10.3.5 is the first system that has proved trouble free for
> me.
>
> Thanks, Awe
>

If you go to the digi website, they do have a list of "blessed" operating
systems. I do recall they skipped over several in the earlier 10.3.x era. Not
to say they don't work, just that they didn't have time to run them all
through rigorous testing.

I went from 10.3.4 to 10.3.7, while jumping to 6.7 LE recently and haven't
had any problems YET.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Related resources
Anonymous
February 4, 2005 9:17:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

10.3.6 is notoriously bad, BTW, not just for ProTools. FYI.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Ty Ford wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 17:35:52 -0500, awespishus wrote
> (in article <1107556552.062002.26380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>):
>
>
>>I've heard a nasty rumour that virtually every version of ProTools
>>after 6.0.1 does not like Mac system 10.3.5. Has anyone heard this and
>>have you had "real world" experience that would either support or
>>refute this? I have to reinstall Mac 6.1 and I want to make sure I am
>>not going to run into any snarls.
>>
>>This all might be moot, however, as Digi suggests I run nothing later
>>than 10.2.8 for my setup (D24 and 2 dsp - non-MIX - farms) but I AM
>>curious as 10.3.5 is the first system that has proved trouble free for
>>me.
>>
>>Thanks, Awe
>>
>
>
> If you go to the digi website, they do have a list of "blessed" operating
> systems. I do recall they skipped over several in the earlier 10.3.x era. Not
> to say they don't work, just that they didn't have time to run them all
> through rigorous testing.
>
> I went from 10.3.4 to 10.3.7, while jumping to 6.7 LE recently and haven't
> had any problems YET.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>
Anonymous
February 5, 2005 12:51:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

awespishus wrote:
> I've heard a nasty rumour that virtually every version of ProTools
> after 6.0.1 does not like Mac system 10.3.5. Has anyone heard this
and
> have you had "real world" experience that would either support or
> refute this? I have to reinstall Mac 6.1 and I want to make sure I
am
> not going to run into any snarls.
>
> This all might be moot, however, as Digi suggests I run nothing later
> than 10.2.8 for my setup (D24 and 2 dsp - non-MIX - farms) but I AM
> curious as 10.3.5 is the first system that has proved trouble free
for
> me.
>
> Thanks, Awe

I had a lot of trouble with my Pro-tools 6.4 HD system until installed
a stripped down 10.3.2 operating system. Since then it has been fine.

On the other hand I have an LE system running 10.3.7 and it behaves
fine..........

I do know that it is best to use a stripped down Mac operating system
ify our computer is just for Pro-tools.

good luck
Anonymous
February 5, 2005 7:34:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>These machines weren't configured by me..if I spend
>$1500 on a new G5 the least they can do is give me...
>called a tech... no luck....
how many machines do you have and how did your tech set them up?
(they are yours?)
most of the problems you are describing are set up problems or operator
error!!!
there are classes... and books.
(owners manual...digi support)
maybe after you fuse the roger's......

dale
Anonymous
February 5, 2005 11:14:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Trevor de Clercq wrote:


> Apple is not stubborn nor do they intend to provide an inferior
> product. Apple's design philosophy often involves streamlining and
> simplification. Many users do not need two buttons and actually
> might become confused by more than one button.


Actually, the Mac has a concept called the half-click (click-and-hold
without dragging, typically 1/2 second), that PCs don't use (why not I
don't know). If a program doesn't recognize this as a right-button
click, the holding the Control key while clicking does it: exactly what
a right-click in windoze does. And if that's not good enough, get a
Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical - the best thing Microsoft makes and it's
the best mouse in the world. I has two buttons and a wheel, and as far
as I can tell, all programs recognize its right-click as you'd expect,
even without installing its driver (which is only needed for the
wheel-click).

In short, you really don't need a second button at all, but if you feel
you need it, spend ten bucks.
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 5:52:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jonny Durango wrote:

> if I spend
> $1500 on a new G5 the least they can do is give me a decent mouse and/or a
> way to bootup when their holier-than-though-operating-system (dare I say)
> CRASHES! *cough* floppy *cough*

Johnny,

Now that I've finished ragging you, did you put any third-party RAM in
that Mac? That's been a problem for lots of folks. Even some RAM that by
type is supposed to work, doesn't work. This has come up repeatedly in
DAW-Mac.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 1:15:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 21:52:56 -0500, hank alrich wrote
(in article <1grixig.15dbxpk232ahwN%walkinay@thegrid.net>):

> Jonny Durango wrote:
>
>> if I spend
>> $1500 on a new G5 the least they can do is give me a decent mouse and/or a
>> way to bootup when their holier-than-though-operating-system (dare I say)
>> CRASHES! *cough* floppy *cough*
>
> Johnny,
>
> Now that I've finished ragging you, did you put any third-party RAM in
> that Mac? That's been a problem for lots of folks. Even some RAM that by
> type is supposed to work, doesn't work. This has come up repeatedly in
> DAW-Mac.
>
> --
> ha

So that 7-11 RAM I got could be cheesing up my system, Uncle Hank?

Ty

-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 7:42:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ty Ford wrote:

> So that 7-11 RAM I got could be cheesing up my system, Uncle Hank?

Yeah, but if it gets you the voigin merry onna peezuh toast you're good
to go ebay.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 7:42:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:

> walkinay>

> > May I suggest that were it not for Apple you'd be trying to edit on a
> > monochrome screen with little yellow letters? <g>

> How many colors do you need for editing? Recording tape is black or
> brown, splicing tape is blue or white. You don't need a color to
> identify the razor blade because it's stiffer than the tape.

And the waveform would have been displayed how? Is there anything at all
to the GUI thing for some of us? <g>

But it's true that I can't shave with my laptop when work is slow. So I
use the end address function of a C414.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 8:22:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 11:42:05 -0500, hank alrich wrote
(in article <1grjzmq.53z9fq12g2xc1N%walkinay@thegrid.net>):

> Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> So that 7-11 RAM I got could be cheesing up my system, Uncle Hank?
>
> Yeah, but if it gets you the voigin merry onna peezuh toast you're good
> to go ebay.
>
> --
> ha

Gawd Bless youse Unca Hank. Now I got it all.

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
!