SMAART on a Netbook?

[TomWalker]

Has anyone tried to run SMAART on a netbook? I have a Dell Mini 9 and am curious if it has the horsepower to run SMAART?

[mackerr]

The computer requirements are in the Smaart section of the RA website:

[Brad Harris]

I used to use a asus 701 (the original netbook) with smaart with no problems, aside from seeing the screen from a slight distance (from monitors), I haven't used it for quite some time as I've got a 12" compaq right now that is fitting the bill nicely, as the 701 doesn't have a large enough screen resolution for running audiocore and a few other programs I required as well.

I've been looking at the 10" netbooks (acer and toshiba) with proper resolutions lately as they've been coming down in price (or on sale) .....

[Arthur Skudra]

This article should be helpful:
http://www.rationalacoustics.com/laptop-computers

[Andy Leviss]

I've actually run it/tried to run it on an MSI Wind U100, in both XP Home and OS X, as my Wind is Hackintoshed. Here's what I've found:

-It is impossible, AFAIK, to run it in Windows on a netbook, unless you know of one with a higher vertical resolution than 600 (most 10" are 1024x600). Smaart needs a minimum resolution of 768 or it won't fit on the screen.

-You CAN run it in OS X via an AppleScript that scales the application down by 10-20% to make it fit, with the side effect that some of the text blurs a bit, but it is definitely usable.

-On a stock MSI Wind, with only 1 GB of RAM, the graphics lag a bit compared to a normal computer, since you're sharing video memory. I suspect that adding the second gig would help (which is only possible on the U100, newer models don't have the expansion slot; in any case, doing so voids the warranty; then again, so presumably does hacking OS X on to it...). There are also now GMA Booster apps that can overclock the onboard graphics, if you dare.

So, if you're not opposed to Hackintoshing it, and don't mind a bit of compromise on graphics speed (which isn't a big deal if you're doing longer averages, it really was only noticeable on short averaged RTA graphs), it's workable, but if you're making heavy use of Smaart, a full laptop is better.

That said, for paperwork, e-mail, and control software/diagnostics, I LOVE the Wind. Best sub-$400 business purchase I've made in quite some time.

--Andy

[Riley Casey]

TO go off topic here for a moment - have you tried the Windows only version of Yamaha Studio Manager needed for the LS9s and M7s on this netbook?





That said, for paperwork, e-mail, and control software/diagnostics, I LOVE the Wind. Best sub-$400 business purchase I've made in quite some time.

--Andy

[Calvert Dayton]

FWIW, if SmaartLive 5 detected 800 x 600 screen resolution on startup it would flip to a special control layout that still managed to cram everything onto the screen. We had gone to some trouble to preserve 800 x 600 support because first generation tablet PCs at the time commonly ran at that resolution. I know it's not smart enough to check the height and width separately but if you can set your resolution to 800 x 600 then SmaartLive 5 should make itself fit.

Of course, by the time Smaart 6's UI was designed, even tablets were running at resolutions in excess of 1024 x 768 and the ultra-mini's hadn't arrived on the scene yet. So there was no such provision in 6. There were actually some even arguing at that point that we could throw 1024 x 768 under the bus, but I thought we'd better keep that as our design target around for one more development cycle so I made stuff fit -- everything but the logo at least.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

Calvert it's funny people were arguing to throw 1024x768 under the bus. I have been incovenienced many times that I couldn't size below the minimum in V6. I'm using a tablet in portrait mode at times and would like Smaart on the top half and my DSP software on the bottom half. The resolution is 1050x1400 so it "just barely" works (but only 700 pixels high for Smaart), but would be nice if I could gain a few more pixels for the DSP App. I think it would be cool to scale like an acrobat document. Everything just gets smaller but all the relationships are maintained. Not sure if that is possible though.

[Calvert Dayton]

You might think it was even funnier if I told you which people... Anyway, yeah I know. Smaart needs to fit in a smaller window. It also needs more controls on the screen including everything we took off the main screen in 6 and a button specifically for everything else the program does, so that even the most arcane feature is never more than one mouse click away. And of course all the controls and graphs need to be bigger/more readable for use on tiny and/or high-res screens. Scoff if you like but I'm pretty sure I could make everyone happy if I could just lay my hands on some magic pixels.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

Hmm,..I would actually remove a few of the redundant controls from 6. Example: I NEVER use the legend in the top graph. I NEVER use the 1 up/ 2up or the individual selection buttons. I turn it on and go straight to the Spectrum button then after verifying all is well I go straight to the Frequency Response button. Interesting you feel the the need to add back more seldomly used buttons. There are a few controls I'd like to have that no previous version has had.........

[Calvert Dayton]

Interesting you feel the the need to add back more seldomly used buttons. Au contraire, Grasshopper. That was actually a fairly accurate blanket summary of user requests (or in some cases, demands) for the UI -- perhaps a little exaggerated, but not by much. Me? I'm a simplifier. I'd strip it down to an on/off switch if I could.


There are a few controls I'd like to have that no previous version has had.........See what I mean? ;)

Just gotta find a source for magic pixels...