Yay a search function! No more guessing which page threads are located on.
Do you think that it would be worth it to make the "No usflib" error always active in the next version if 64th Note? We seem to get quite a few questions about this, and I know that at first I thought that the usflib was not needed. After all, if you play SPCs, GYMs, etc. there is one file per track. Why should USFs be any different?
Anyway, I was corrected by an error message that appeared in V0.01 or whatever version that I had, and now I understand how it works. I think that if the error were always enabled that there would be less confusion as to how USFs work. It is just a thought.
Lastly, this is the last post from me in this thread that will be directed at UNKNOWNFILE because I don't want to ruin Rebel's thread. UF, I just want you to know that I am not trying to be mean or anything. After your posts against newbies and that furry thread, I figured that I would give you a hard time for a little while. I have to agree with hcs that you seem very intelligent and you have quite an outgoing personality, but all of that is overshadowed by the cynical/immature remarks that you make. To get down to the point, you will gain more friends and more acclaim if you try to behave yourself in a respectable manner.
OK, discussion over.
Rebel, I thought that there was a program somewhere that would indeed play USFs on a Mac. Maybe XMMS? I can't remember, but I am sure that someone else can enlighten me.
For what my knowledge is worth, not having a Mac, there is no known way to play USFs on a Mac. Darwine has been suggested but supposedly doesn't work yet.
64th Note relies on recompilation for speed. That does not port well. Unless there's an emulation layer which will dynamically translate self modifying x86 instructions into PPC it won't happen. If this does exist, well happy day.
I don't have a Mac to test that on, but the "developer homepage" (http://www.winamp.com/download/mac/) doesn't exist anymore. I very much doubt this would be usable with plugins built for x86 (i.e., all of them). It might be a port of Winamp, but it'd still require ported plugins (if it has plugin support at all).
Ok, so I read Apple's blurb about Universal Applications. It sounds like you just package two versions of the binary together...
edited 8:43 PM EST March 15, 2006
Then I read some more about Rosetta...
edited 8:47 PM EST March 15, 2006
So are you suggesting that I try writing something for PowerPC using an x86 version's PowerPC emulation? "According to Apple, applications with heavy user interaction but low computational needs (such as word processors) are well suited to translation via Rosetta, while applications with high computational needs (such as raytracers or Photoshop) are not." I don't think this will work well.
I personally have the x86 version of Mac OS X, version 10.4.1, and it is incompatible with most Intel applications. I'm downloading 10.4.4, and I'll see what I can do.
And if you build 64th note for Mac, it should be x86 and PowerPC. Just my thoughts.