Jump to content
Did you know?
  • The original Rudolph did not have a red nose. In that day and age, red noses were seen as an indicator of chronic alcoholism and Montgomery Ward didn’t want him to look like a drunkard. To complete the original picture, he was almost named Reginald or Rollo.
  • The Christmas wreath was originally hung as a symbol of Jesus. The holly represents his crown of thorns and the red berries the blood he shed.
  • The three traditional colors of most Christmas decorations are red, green and gold. Red symbolizes the blood of Christ, green symbolized life and rebirth, and gold represents light, royalty and wealth.
  • Tinsel was invented in 1610 in Germany and was once made of real silver.
  • The oldest artificial Christmas trees date back to the late 1800s and were made of green raffia (think grass hula skirts) or dyed goose feathers. Next the Addis Brush Company used their machinery that wove toilet brushes to create pine-like branches for artificial Christmas trees that were less flammable and could hold heavier decorations.
  • ‘Jingle Bells’ – the popular Christmas song was composed by James Pierpont in Massachusetts, America. It was, however, written for thanksgiving and not Christmas.
  • Coca-Cola was the first company that used Santa Claus during the winter season for promotion.
  • Hallmark introduced their first Christmas cards in 1915.
  • The first recorded date of Christmas being celebrated on December 25th was in 336, during the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine. A few years later, Pope Julius I officially declared that the birth of Jesus would be celebrated on that day.
  • Santa Claus's sleigh is led by eight reindeer: Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Dunder (variously spelled Donder and Donner), and Blixem (variously spelled Blixen and Blitzen), with Rudolph being a 20th-century inclusion.
  • Outdoor Christmas lights on homes evolved from decorating the traditional Christmas tree and house with candles during the Christmas season. Lighting the tree with small candles dates back to the 17th century and originated in Germany before spreading to Eastern Europe.
  • That big, jolly man in the red suit with a white beard didn’t always look that way. Prior to 1931, Santa was depicted as everything from a tall gaunt man to a spooky-looking elf. He has donned a bishop's robe and a Norse huntsman's animal skin. When Civil War cartoonist Thomas Nast drew Santa Claus for Harper's Weekly in 1862, Santa was a small elflike figure who supported the Union. Nast continued to draw Santa for 30 years, changing the color of his coat from tan to the red he’s known for today.
  • Christmas 2018 countdown has already begun. Will you be ready???
  • Why do we love Christmas? It's all about the traditions. In this chaotic world we can miss the "good old days." Christmas reminds us of that time.
TheBigE

LSP vs LOR S2

Recommended Posts

David

not to be nitpicky but a ramp is a fade.

I think you meant to say ramping twinkles and shimmers

Yes... My mistake... twinkles and shimmers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(as promised in this post over at the LOR Forums nearly two years ago).

I took that post to mean "if we totally change the LOR protocol, we won't leave users using D-Light hanging with now-useless hardware". I didn't read that to mean they'd reverse-engineer firmware upgrades to add every new S2 feature into competing products. Dan's post isn't 100% clear on that, though, so I can see where you're getting that, especially now. I believe at one time LOR was considering totally changing the protocol.

Probably woudn't hurt to ask the man himself though :)

Don't feel bad, almost half of my display uses LOR CTB-08 controllers, and those don't support the new commands either. So it's not just D-Light users who are out of luck on these things... (even worse, almost every 'logical' group of things I have, like minis, arches, mega-tree, etc contains at least one CTB-08 so I can't even use the new commands in part of the display. And moving controllers around would require more effort/wire running than I'm willing to expend on this...)

-Timn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...And moving controllers around would require more effort/wire running than I'm willing to expend on this...)

-Timn

Kinda like bothering to spell your name right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda like bothering to spell your name right?

This is that absent minded thing we were talking about in the coro thread. Tim, when was your last CAT scan? This grant thing must really have you preoccupied. Now I'm kind worried. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW--this is a little off topic, but to be fair, there are reasons to purchase LOR controllers over D-Light, and Dan details them in his post in this thread at the LOR Forums. Not like the decision to go with LSP/Aurora/S2 software isn't complicated enough. :eek:

Here is a feature by feature comparison between LOR/D-light/Renard/Lynx controllers:

http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/Controller%20Features%20and%20Functions%20Comparison.pdf

Here is a price comparison between LOR/D-light/Lynx/Renard:

http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/Controller%20Cost%20Comparison.pdf

While there are 101 little differences between the controllers... the major difference with LOR and d-Light is LOR supports DMX. Future proof hardware....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is that absent minded thing we were talking about in the coro thread. Tim, when was your last CAT scan? This grant thing must really have you preoccupied. Now I'm kind worried. :o

You guys make such a big deal over a finger-fumble :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took that post to mean "if we totally change the LOR protocol, we won't leave users using D-Light hanging with now-useless hardware". I didn't read that to mean they'd reverse-engineer firmware upgrades to add every new S2 feature into competing products. Dan's post isn't 100% clear on that, though, so I can see where you're getting that, especially now. I believe at one time LOR was considering totally changing the protocol.

The major difference with LOR's protocol vs DMX is that the "knowledge" of how to even do a ramping twinkle/shimmer is in the controller firmware. So, d-Light wrote an extension to the LOR commands to do their ramping twinkle/shimmer and then when LOR came along, they wrote another version of the same command. The post that is referenced is saying that yes - to support these "new" features (command), you'll need to be flashing your firmware on the LOR controllers.

So, for d-light to be "compatible" with LOR S2 ramping shimmer/twinkles, they'd need to look at the protocol (pretty simple) and then make adjustments within their firmware. I'm not getting the impression that d-light wants to do this. So...

If LOR completely changed the protocol, which I really doubt they would do since it would 1) piss off d-Light users, 2) require ALL their controllers/iDMX firmware to be upgraded, 3) they just added the 256 addressing to the firmware... why add 256 addressing and then scrap the entire thing to rebuild from scratch?

Probably woudn't hurt to ask the man himself though :)

I'm pretty sure they have forums.planetchristmas.com in their favorites folder. :)

Don't feel bad, almost half of my display uses LOR CTB-08 controllers, and those don't support the new commands either. So it's not just D-Light users who are out of luck on these things... (even worse, almost every 'logical' group of things I have, like minis, arches, mega-tree, etc contains at least one CTB-08 so I can't even use the new commands in part of the display. And moving controllers around would require more effort/wire running than I'm willing to expend on this...)

I'm not feeling bad - going forward I'm only purchasing controllers that support DMX so that if something goes really bad (LOR goes out of business, new DMX controller software comes out, LOR creates a new protocol, etc) I'm not s tuck with a brick. I'll be picking up some more LOR DC controllers exactly becuase they do support DMX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If LOR completely changed the protocol, which I really doubt they would do since it would 1) piss off d-Light users, 2) require ALL their controllers/iDMX firmware to be upgraded, 3) they just added the 256 addressing to the firmware... why add 256 addressing and then scrap the entire thing to rebuild from scratch? .

I think you're correct with today's hindsight. Dan's post was from (I think) 2008 when there were rumors of LOR doing exactly that (changing the protocol completely). That's why I think Dan was addressing the fear from D-Light users (even though he shouldn't have to support 3rd-party products that just happen to use his protocol, unless there's some sort of licensing agreement going on).

It doesn't seem likely today that the protocol will drasically change though, but I'm just speculating like any other outsider. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're correct with today's hindsight. Dan's post was from (I think) 2008 when there were rumors of LOR doing exactly that (changing the protocol completely). That's why I think Dan was addressing the fear from D-Light users (even though he shouldn't have to support 3rd-party products that just happen to use his protocol, unless there's some sort of licensing agreement going on).

It doesn't seem likely today that the protocol will drasically change though, but I'm just speculating like any other outsider. :)

LOR just wasn't as strong an industry player several years back as it is now so I can see why he may have been worried about making sure the d-light hardware was "compatible". It's crazy to think (even though Dan says it in the post) that they'd write the firmware to support the d-light controller...really complicated when you consider you'd need to replace the bootloader on the PIC.

I'm really most suprised that d-Light doesn't just fix it... of course I guess it depends on who you feel "broke it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought most current LOR controllers will also work in DMX mode anyways?

You are getting good at catching my mistakes today! ;)

"going forward I'm only purchasing controllers that support DMX so that if something goes really bad (LOR goes out of business..."

Yes, I'd be fine if LOR went out of business since it does support DMX..

"I'll be picking up some more LOR DC controllers exactly becuase they do support DMX. "

Crazy me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO if you are just starting out and don't really know LOR LSP is great. The main reason i switched was because i sold all my LOR stuff and went LYNX which is DMX. i can import sequences with all the major software, and since most of my show was LOR it was nice. but LSP is still not perfect, it is a resource hog, and scheduler was not perfect but i know David will fix this. I think LSP is fun to use and has some really neat tools, and is like a fine wine, it only gets better with age. :). i know some people have had some issues, but who doesn't have somthing they like or don't, IF their is a problem, let them know so they can fix it. David has always worked with me , on any problem. I am sold on LSP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took that post to mean "if we totally change the LOR protocol, we won't leave users using D-Light hanging with now-useless hardware".

Then you are incorrect. While it had been discussed previously, a complete change in the protocol was not part of the specific discussions surrounding LOR's offering to provide firmware "for cards made by other vendors". There was a good deal of concern from users with multiple controllers from both LOR and D-Light suddenly not having certain functionality available to them for part of their systems when using updated versions of LOR-S2. And these concerns about "some additional enhancements [that] MAY require protocol changes" included, but were not limited to the ability to fade shimmer/twinkle commands.

I didn't read that to mean they'd reverse-engineer firmware upgrades to add every new S2 feature into competing products. Dan's post isn't 100% clear on that, though, so I can see where you're getting that, especially now.

This isn't about looking at Dan's post with today's knowledge. It's about looking at his post in the context of the events surrounding it as one who took part in the discussions (both public and private) that eventually lead to his announcement. No one asked or was expecting LOR to provide firmware versions for other controllers. Dan offered the option to ease concerns about losing certain functionality (i.e.: the ability to fade of shimmer/twinkle that was already available to D-Light users before becoming a part of LOR-S2).

I think you're correct with today's hindsight. Dan's post was from (I think) 2008 when there were rumors of LOR doing exactly that (changing the protocol completely). That's why I think Dan was addressing the fear from D-Light users (even though he shouldn't have to support 3rd-party products that just happen to use his protocol, unless there's some sort of licensing agreement going on).

It doesn't seem likely today that the protocol will drasically change though, but I'm just speculating like any other outsider. :)

I never really took the rumors of a complete change in the LOR protocol very seriously, as it would hurt too many users. Not only the owner's of the old 8 channel LOR boards, but anyone that had already invested a goodly amount of money in any brand of controller that has been using the LOR protocol.

LOR just wasn't as strong an industry player several years back as it is now so I can see why he may have been worried about making sure the d-light hardware was "compatible". It's crazy to think (even though Dan says it in the post) that they'd write the firmware to support the d-light controller...really complicated when you consider you'd need to replace the bootloader on the PIC.

I'm really most suprised that d-Light doesn't just fix it... of course I guess it depends on who you feel "broke it".

D-Light/Aurora/LSP/Vixen are very small operations in comparison to LOR. Aurora and Vixen are basically one-man shows. Save for Animated Lighting (another issue), LOR has been the ONLY real industry player, so I don't think that LOR has ever really been worried about needing to make sure that it's equipment/software is compatible with anything. I think what drives LOR is it's desire to serve it's customers. The smaller companies keep coming up with little innovations to try and gain a market edge, and LOR either incorporates these innovations or revises them to create it's own product (i.e.: audio waveform, picture in visualizer, Firefli vs CCR, servo control, etc.) As Dan mentioned in this post "Because of our high volume and minimal overhead we can give you more for your money."

Back to the comparison between LOR-S2 and LSP. If you own or plan to own any controller other than LOR's (i.e.: Renard, D-Light, Lynx, etc.), you may find yourself with compatibilty issues with LOR-S2, if not already. If you like to buy many different breeds of toys, then you may be better served by using a software that routinely adds output options (LSP) or plugins (Vixen). Of course, if you have DMX compatible gear, your concerns are somewhat lessened, though there is a price to be paid for incorporating this additional protocol. DMX-512 is contolled by USITT and they want a little cut for it's use. Hence the additional cost associated with equipment using the DMX protocol. Not to mention more expensive cabling. :eek:

Edited by tonyjmartin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...