OS2XL is slightly smaller then OS2

Looks like JJ was able to optimize things a bit and get some codespace back:
MPC1000 JJ OS2
Version File name Size Available Upload day
1.22 mpc1000_jv122.os2 1015KB Download Nov 07, 2008

If not OS1 of Ver4.98I or more version into which the password was entered,
the file of OS2XL will not be displayed on the screen of load.
MPC1000 JJ OS2XL
Version File name Size Available Upload day
1.00 mpc1000_xl100.os2 978KB Download Dec 22, 2008


Looks like the JJOS2XL is about 43KB smaller then OS2. More room for new features in the future

"Looks like the JJOS2XL is about 43KB smaller then OS2. More room for new features in the future"

Here we go again...

wudsiba wrote:"Looks like the JJOS2XL is about 43KB smaller then OS2. More room for new features in the future"

Here we go again...

or maybe bug fixes and returning of missing features?

NearTao wrote:

wudsiba wrote:"Looks like the JJOS2XL is about 43KB smaller then OS2. More room for new features in the future"

Here we go again...

or maybe bug fixes and returning of missing features?

Exactly.. Where's the Mixer Automation

part of me is tempted to...

(quoting JJ) -

"JJ OS2XL Ver1.xx =>JJ OS2 Ver1.2x =>JJ OS2XL Ver1.xx ( A password is unnecessary. )"

until the os2 functionality returns

Exactly.. Where's the Mixer Automation

in os2. enjoy!

Nym wrote:

Exactly.. Where's the Mixer Automation

in os2. enjoy!

With all due respect, removing features seems a bit amateur. And, It makes sequence compatibility between OS versions a joke. Sure you can just boot the old OS(from my understanding), but what a lame work around.

you don't have to adopt os2xl, nobody's twisting your arms

having an understanding of the underpinnings of the operating system would be in order before making a judgement on whether or not something is "amateur." this is far more complicated than simply "Removing features" as if you were yanking out a thumbdrive or cf card from your PC.

if os2xl's primary added functions are not more appropriate to your priority's than os2's, stick with os2

50% of the development time of os2 was dedicated to compatibiltiy with os1, and most of us who used os1 deeply still found the old projects didn't load right. development time was prioritized in os2xl for a wider feature set and more overall ease of use.

i've worked on finishing and tracking out all os2 projects so that i can start anew in 2xl.

Nym wrote:having an understanding of the underpinnings of the operating system would be in order before making a judgement on whether or not something is "amateur."

Amateur, as in: amateur business decision. I don't need the MPC2500/1000 OS dev tools to tell me that.

that's better, but still, even the Akai os had features that jjos2xl/os2 don't have, amp to velocity/sample start for instance, and 4 layers instead of 3, etc. these still illustrate the point that there's more going on than just puttin em in and pullin em out and as such deserve a degree of consideration

Nym wrote:that's better, but still, even the Akai os had features that jjos2xl/os2 don't have, amp to velocity/sample start for instance, and 4 layers instead of 3, etc. these still illustrate the point that there's more going on than just puttin em in and pullin em out and as such deserve a degree of consideration

Which significant functions has Akai taken away from their own versions of the MPC1000 OS? None. Why? It would be amateurish.

T7 wrote:

Nym wrote:that's better, but still, even the Akai os had features that jjos2xl/os2 don't have, amp to velocity/sample start for instance, and 4 layers instead of 3, etc. these still illustrate the point that there's more going on than just puttin em in and pullin em out and as such deserve a degree of consideration

Which significant functions has Akai taken away from their own versions of the MPC1000 OS? None. Why? It would be amateurish.

Amateurish is perhaps a bit harsh. Companies remove features all of the time, but generally give at least comparable (if not perfectly 100%) replacements all the time. I don't argue that it is okay to remove features if there is an alternative or better way to do something... but a complete removal of functionality is pretty tough to swallow.

For now I'm hoping that the mixer automation removal is a sign of future improvements that weren't fully baked for JJOS2XL v1.00, but I'm keeping faith that we'll see it return in a future update. Perhaps as the fabled CC engine rewrite? At any rate, There are enough exciting new features and improvements in XL that I'm not going to dwell on it for now. Besides, how many people thought OS2 had stagnated and no future work was being done?

T7, since you went there, which OS is more amateurish, jjos2xl or akai 2.11?
perhaps not where you were going with this, but worth the consideration

Besides, how many people thought OS2 had stagnated and no future work was being done?

yup. even those at first verbally irked by the removal of 4rd layer, 2nd filter, and amp=>envelope/sample start were wooed by the overall increased functionality of os2 over 1. you won't hear anyone saying os2 was inferior to 1, only maybe that 1 suited their needs better, which is still completely valid

All I'm sayin' is, if it's recorded and saved in a sequence, leave it in the OS.

and all i'm saying is that it's unfortunately not that simple.
in the real world os2xl would never have happened if 100% compatibility was maintained. the amount of work would have been monstrous.