![]() ![]() If it supported standards, all of that development work would not be required as we really could implement our own control solutions and tie-in other tools easily. It is forced to work alone, and has to try to provide its own approach to user-designed controls. Using only a proprietary API makes mimoLive an island. Debugging such communications would be a huge pain as well as there would be multiple socket connections and multiple data translations involved–for no good reason. Users should not have to awkwardly design and maintain a web control solution just so that they can then integrate the controls they actually need. Trying to make it a bridge to standards-based communication is not a good idea, and will just result in a really difficult to maintain codebase–without even providing the benefits of rapid communication setup like we enjoy with tools which have these communications integrated. The web API is cool, but it is not providing compatibility to… anything but itself, really. That lets people build systems that are bigger than one piece of software. The point is to be standardly compatible and to speak the same language as other, similar tools. ![]() So for instance if you use a hardware controller to mute an audio channel, you can easily indicate that channel as muted on the hardware, and in different software, or ALL the other software, for that matter.īut none of them have a proprietary web API because that would serve little purpose. Most of them can not only receive, but also send commands to each other. They are designed to intercommunicate with unknown collaborators. Except for a couple of them, they are not music software. All support some combination of midi, OSC, and DMX. Unity, Unreal engine, Max, Resolume, Millumin, Wirecast, VDMX, Vezer, Coge, Vuo, MadMapper, QLab, Traktor, Live, Lemur, DMXis, TouchOSC and more. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |