Its newer stupid to ask questions! That is why we are here :) Welcome to the forum!
Go to the Index forums.highend.com/index.php Then there are topics, click one that is related to your question, then in the top left there is a small square "New Thread"
personally, I think the system would be good enough as it is, at least, you should replace the touch screen with multi touch panels (and then change the software so that it can meet the needs multi-touch, as To date, no windows, linux and neither is compatible with multi-touch (In fact you can not split the pointer in windows simultaneously in two places at once, this is because it uses the main input-mouse pointer))), at least 20 motorized faders, 30 executor buttons least, it could be replaced by a 7''monitor multi touch directly on the bridge of the console (to be clear in the area where there is the numeric keypad), where the various functions can be implemented, it could insert a page with the executor virtual buttons that change color depending on the function of time, for any features you could give rein to their imagination, ie. maps of color mixing CMY ma2 like, add more pages of virtual faders, ecc.
but this would be like, copy something that already exists, or change something that already is a real ... like ma2
I am for the virtualization of systems, namely: you can create a machine in which instead of the numeric keypad and cursors, there is a multi-touch panel, where there are virtualized, buttons, faders, buttons, players, virtual display, in fact, completely eliminate the physical hardware and virtualize throughout a multi-touch, but not inductive resistive touch modules (those that work, even if dirty, as ipad2)
the idea is to virtualize everything, so that each user can choose the configuration of the virtual control panel, most preferred, for example, today I need 20 sliders, 10 executor buttons, and 1x a/b 1x c/d On another occasion I would serve 40 faders etc., it would be possible with this system is through the standardized profiles, edit in the true sense, the console. but of course this is just a conceptual project, made ... mah knows whether it is possible! :-)
Obviously this new machine, I'll have all that now exist in the implementation of systems engineering, art.net port, CITP support, Real Network tracking / backup, multi user system, virtually a completely new system, with a new effect engineer, visualizer, of course, all this, and they need a system processor CPU and GPU than recently, so you can upgrade to a future without hardware problems, virtually reinventing it from zero with the console would EXCLUSIVELY wholehog3 the blue side! ...
While the versatility of a multi-touch config is inarguable, the lack of tactile feedback, at least for me, is a no-deal item on that config. If I can't tell where I am on the console by feel (IE watching the stage) then I am sure that it would drive me nuts!
I think you are all trying to make the Hog 3 a Grand ma????? like car's consoles all have there application. full boar and H3 are grate platforms to work from,
i don't think we need a hog4 right now, being more or less a wannabe grand ma2. if my shows requires the functionality of grandma2, i go for the real thing, if it doesn't, i take hogIII. if hog4 is to make any sense, it must be designed to stay a top grade console for ten years, keeping the hog style of work and the compact size. and, think twice before you make it pink or yellow!
[QUOTE=tymon;53964]one of the main problems of hogIII is that it never really used the power its gpu's offer.
Having spent a good portion of the last 18 months tuning the HogIII's video performance for the 3.2 software release, I'd have to say this isn't really true.
The term "GPU" didn't even exist at the time the graphics chip used in the HogIII was designed.
no offence intended. i just remember having, like nine years ago, a little sightseeing in the hog's guts, including trying to run glxgears and reading the x server config file with vi. these days it wasn't /etc/xorg.conf, but something else, don't even remember. i couldn't find a sign of using any graphic acceleration whatsoever. this is where my belief you disagree with was coming from. i am really happy to hear this is no longer true!
[QUOTE=tymon;53982] including trying to run glxgears
glxgears is an OpenGL performance test. It's used to test the 3D capabilities of an OpenGL based rendering system. The HogIII doesn't support OpenGL at all. Any OpenGL calls would have fallen back to Mesa3D software rendering which is several orders of magnitude slower.
