DSP Robotics Support

@Support
Is there any word on a 64 bit version of Flow Stone ?

I know that you had planned on tackling the 64 bit version before the Ruby fix was required, (As referenced here.. http://synthmaker.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11686&st=0&sk=t&sd=a) but since the Ruby fix is now complete, do you have any news on, or have you got back to working on the 64 bit version? I know that having to do that ruby fix sort of put a monkey wrench in your plans a little as you had mentioned that the 64 bit version was going to be one of the planned updates for the new sales/marketing strategy.
(Regular updates in exchange for buying new versions more often?, or something like that?)

Either way, the Ruby update is most appreciated, but, I suspect the 64 bit version will definitely loosen some purse strings. I for one am completely looking forward to it..

Thank you

Someone know something?

Macl Wrote: " After release we'll be straight onto looking at 64bit. "

Well, i believe 64bit is not easy to develope. They might need some time, and no complains about it.
But, what i'm saying is just say a word about it. let us know iwhat is going on. We
need a time idication. that's all.

Unless for compatibility & memory reasons I guess its not time yet. . .

https://www.ableton.com/en/articles/64bit-myths-facts/

Unless for compatibility & memory reasons I guess its not time yet

Almost everybody moved to 64bit daws, and they are not looking behind for 2 reasons:
First, they want the best performance potential they can get in every project and second, they want their projects to match the next generation standard abilities and system Requirements , because when 32bit will die as an "industry standard" (and it will happen very soon), 32bit daw's projects will die with them and become useless.
so when people start a new project in 64bit, they actually prepare to that day when 32bit is no longer exists.
and we , as developers, must be ready to provide them that need, or they will not buy from us.

...

64 bit is required for many reasons.

1) give a look of professionality to our works. (they migth are, but when the x64 is not available it look so).
2) Possibility to make stuff using more memory that actually. SM/FS actually sucks in memory managment
3) Possibility to extend the use of audio samples
4) Start learning and working in a 64bit developement

We can start with a flowstone 64 bit test enviroment.. Proceed to plugin upgrade and then when they make it go straigth to final x64 version.

Many* uses or want to use 64bit plugins without a bridge. That's a commercial thing.

We are always divided by people who sell, people who just try out. (or maybe they are just no user).

...

Did you made extensive research on everybody to pick these "almost" part?

You are right. maybe saying "almost evryone I know" (and I know people) would reflect the reality better. anyway, that part of my post is not the primary one.

1) give a look of professionality to our works. (they migth are, but when the x64 is not available it look so).

Saying that was relevant about 2 years ago, when most people still dreamed about totaly moving to 64bit but still used 32bit, because lot of popular useful tools didn't have a 64bit version. Today, it's not just a Curiosity, "to give it a look of professionality". today its a matter of life and death for a small developer who wants to hit the market.

Tester you migth be able to do more.
I like to design and experiment, i probably not able to build the enitre stuff in c++.

Is not just language.. Is math.

I like to create some ideas, don't being a super pro enancher of fantastic super hyper low CPU and super quality softwares..

My idea in c++ will make me old before i realised it.

That's why Flowstone can for many be a fast development too, but requires some things more.

Im lookin @ synthedit now, but one-person softwares like these sometimes...

I would like to see x64 as much i would really have a SDK for building custom primitives.

OSX is cool too.