Same reason as Alexander Connor, I mainly work with computers of different backgrounds, including different OS and many are older than 5 years. The new GUI, although very nice, does cause increased processing. On top of Purr-Data not being supported for mac 10.8 and lower. On a side note, I did test the CEAMMC Puredata distribution and it works better in older systems although it is also not supported. I believe they use QT.
cheers On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Alexander Connor <a.conn...@runbox.com> wrote: > Increased processing overhead with the new GUI -- assuming that matters > with a specific computer set-up. > > > > > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 13:48:09 -0400, Ali Momeni <batc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I've been playing around with the latest Purr Data from: > > https://agraef.github.io/purr-data/ > > > > and, well, I love it. The entire experience of working with Pd is much > > more pleasant. > > > > I'm compelled to ask the group, especially the Pd Vanilla users among us, > > the following simple question: > > > > What reason is there NOT to use Purr Data? > > > > Am I missing something? > > Subtle disadvantages? > > Missing functionality? > > Reliability? > > Performance? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > ali > > _______________________________________________ > > Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/ > listinfo/pd-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/ > listinfo/pd-list > -- José Rafael Subía Valdez www.jrsv.net
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list