Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus? — Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

iOS 15 is out!

123468

Comments

  • NeuMNeuM

    @richardyot said:

    @tja said:
    iPadOS 14.8:

    iPadOS 15:

    I really hate it.

    At best, they would offer an option to stay at the older layout with 5 columns.

    It looks like you can now add an extra horizontal row of icons though (confirmed by the other screenshot from @TonalityApp below), so you can fit more icons on each page. I think that's pretty useful.

    Check out the video link I posted (above). You’d be surprised at what you can do with iOS 15. I was.

  • jonmoorejonmoore

    All in all a good update with a minimum of irritations. Apple are definitely getting far more done during the open beta phase which is helping the dot zero release. Files app is still a mess and widgets are ever infringing on the UX but otherwise happy (I've only updated older devices so far and have chosen to stick with 14.8 on the iPad Pro for the moment).

  • tjatja

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

  • NeonSiliconNeonSilicon

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

    They don't have to send the data out themselves to be a security hole. It could come in any sort of website you intentionally visit later and they get to autofill for you for example. My point is that the second something sees data, it is possible for it to leak in unpredictable ways.

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

    Don’t give them permission. @NeonSilicon is simply explaining how things work with this system and why certain access is required for extensions to work. He/she isn’t suggesting that you give permission only that extensions wouldn’t work without the access.

    The potential for a clever bad actor to do bad things is there—though the sandboxing is pretty good—so it is wise to only give permission if you trust the source.

  • tjatja

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

    They don't have to send the data out themselves to be a security hole. It could come in any sort of website you intentionally visit later and they get to autofill for you for example. My point is that the second something sees data, it is possible for it to leak in unpredictable ways.

    Yes, that's a valid point.
    From the warning Safari gave and from what you posted, I feel no need to run extentions.
    Wayyyyy too unsecure, intentionally or not.

    Let's close this now 😅

  • CarnbotCarnbot

    If I was that worried about security I'd be more concerned with iOS itself (just ask Edward Snowden) rather than a browser extension, since I can always choose not to install any extensions. I can't choose not to install iOS on it :smiley:

  • tjatja
    edited September 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

    Don’t give them permission. @NeonSilicon is simply explaining how things work with this system and why certain access is required for extensions to work. He/she isn’t suggesting that you give permission only that extensions wouldn’t work without the access.

    The potential for a clever bad actor to do bad things is there—though the sandboxing is pretty good—so it is wise to only give permission if you trust the source.

    Yes, that may explain why I had the impression that we did not really talk to each other - thanks for clarifying!

    I still think that Apple could have prevented extentions to send out data or to modify data (that may then be pasted to websites).
    EDIT: Many plugins do no seem require such access, like changing the color of the website.

    That would make the whole thing more trustworthy.

  • tjatja

    @Carnbot said:
    If I was that worried about security I'd be more concerned with iOS itself (just ask Edward Snowden) rather than a browser extension, since I can always choose not to install any extensions. I can't choose not to install iOS on it :smiley:

    True.
    But here I have not much choice, beside changing the platform.

  • michael_mmichael_m

    @NeuM said:
    I’m going to post this link with a caveat. This is a very advanced user taking full advantage of the new iOS 15 features, so what he demonstrates won’t be useful for all people here, but for a certain number of heavy iPadOS users his demonstration of its capabilities will be invaluable.

    Mostly follows the features page on the Apple site, so didn’t find anything entirely new, but a couple of small details were useful.

  • NeonSiliconNeonSilicon

    @espiegel123 said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:

    @tja said:

    @NeonSilicon said:
    What you seem to be asking for is the same as asking a reverb AUv3 to add reverb to your audio signal without being able to see the audio data. That obviously couldn't work just as much as a password manager couldn't work without being able to see the form data or a VPN extension couldn't work without seeing the data steam.

    No.
    What I expected Apple to do, is to disable such Plugins to access the filesystem, other processes and esp. to send anything out.

    Handling tabs and color or darkmode of the browser does not need the abilities mentioned above.
    This system is very very vulnerable and any developer who wants to do something is free to do so.
    This should not even be possible and trusting the devopler should not be required.
    Not a system that I would use on my devices.

    Have fun using it, until some breaking news about the "Mobile Safari browser extention leaks"... with some attached scandal or so.

    If you completely disabled filesystem access the typical user would still sit with Safari open all the time and the extension could just hold it in RAM until you went to the website that the data could be sent too. It wouldn't stop all possible sources of data escaping. The extension system does exactly what it should do and the sandboxing does what it is supposed to do. Also, this is the same as it runs on macOS. I haven't heard any mass of complaints there other than it being too restrictive.

    So, have you deleted all the applications on your Windows system yet?

    You still don't want to understand.
    I am aware that I implicitly need to somewhat trust any application that I install!

    But I install mostly Apps that I at least somewhat trust and only for things that I really need.

    I would never ever install a regular App on any operating system that claims to get Safari into dark mode!
    That's too small a feature to risk installing an App!

    But I would install such a browser plugin - if browser plugins were sandboxed as I wrote.
    When they can access the filesystem, other procesees or change data to be posted or even post by themselves, they are not usable in my book - at all and ever.
    I just don't need that.

    For me, they would need to be implemented like the AUs in an AU host.
    Much more sandboxed.

    They are sandboxed. They are extensions. They have to access the data on the webpage you point them at. They don't have IPC access to any other process. Everything on iOS is sandboxed heavily. The permissions you grant them are very fine grained. It's the same sort of thing as granting mic access to audio applications. The system is just telling you that the application is asking for access.

    I wouldn't grant any sort of access to any safari extension that I didn't need and have pretty good reason to trust.

    The important point is that web extensions have to access the data you want them to manipulate. This leads to unavoidable security holes. IOS informed you of this issue. The access that iOS has to grant extensions is unavoidable if it is going to enable extensions that people want. So, ti warned you and enable you to tell an extension that you don't trust that you won't allow it.

    We both talk to the wood instead of to the other person 😅

    Once again:

    I have no technical knowledge about what those extentions can do or cannot do.
    I only know, what YOU wrote!

    You wrote that such an extention can save data (for example visited URLs or pasted password) - which is totally understandable and acceptable - BUT in my book, they would not need the possibility to send data to some webpage!

    This simply is a giant security hole.

    As soon as any such extention can send data out, whereever and however, the whole extention system is unusable in my book!
    And should be for anybody.

    In this case, you would need to trust some unknown little developer and his intentions, or as I wrote, many many groups would start offering such extentions, just to get your most private data.
    To think otherwise, seems naiv.

    Don’t give them permission. @NeonSilicon is simply explaining how things work with this system and why certain access is required for extensions to work. He/she isn’t suggesting that you give permission only that extensions wouldn’t work without the access.

    The potential for a clever bad actor to do bad things is there—though the sandboxing is pretty good—so it is wise to only give permission if you trust the source.

    Yes. Exactly. Thank you for saying this much better than I did.

  • GLaceyGLacey

    Seems Ob-Xd doesn’t start in standalone (at least on my Air3)

  • MadGavMadGav

    @GLacey said:
    Seems Ob-Xd doesn’t start in standalone (at least on my Air3)

    Ahh… you may have seen my reply on another thread with crashing on an Air 3, could this be model-specific?

  • Bon_TempiBon_Tempi

    Any news about the missing-auv3-bug or the audio-engine-not-Running-one?

    Has IOS15 cured us from these plagues?

  • FordTimeLordFordTimeLord

    @Bon_Tempi said:
    Any news about the missing-auv3-bug or the audio-engine-not-Running-one?

    Has IOS15 cured us from these plagues?

    I took the plunge, all good so far with the audio engine bug. Fingers crossed it stays that way 🤞

  • michael_mmichael_m

    The only issue I have found so far is that Impaktor crashes every time I try to export a loop from my iPhone.

  • craftycuratecraftycurate
    edited September 2021

    So far, iOS 15 seems quite nippy … apps opening more quickly, performance a little more crisp, compared with 13.6.1 which is what I updated from.

    Is anyone else finding this?

    AUM with a bunch of apps performed smoothly so far …

  • supadomsupadom

    @michael_m said:

    @NeuM said:
    I’m going to post this link with a caveat. This is a very advanced user taking full advantage of the new iOS 15 features, so what he demonstrates won’t be useful for all people here, but for a certain number of heavy iPadOS users his demonstration of its capabilities will be invaluable.

    Mostly follows the features page on the Apple site, so didn’t find anything entirely new, but a couple of small details were useful.

    Gosh, this is the 45mins of my life I’ll never get back. I personally stopped curating my home screen as if it was a window display so almost everything is just smoke. I remember this kind of customisation being a thing years ago on Android.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @supadom said:

    @michael_m said:

    @NeuM said:
    I’m going to post this link with a caveat. This is a very advanced user taking full advantage of the new iOS 15 features, so what he demonstrates won’t be useful for all people here, but for a certain number of heavy iPadOS users his demonstration of its capabilities will be invaluable.

    Mostly follows the features page on the Apple site, so didn’t find anything entirely new, but a couple of small details were useful.

    Gosh, this is the 45mins of my life I’ll never get back. I personally stopped curating my home screen as if it was a window display so almost everything is just smoke. I remember this kind of customisation being a thing years ago on Android.

    As I said. The video isn’t for everyone. ;)

  • supadomsupadom

    @NeuM said:

    @supadom said:

    @michael_m said:

    @NeuM said:
    I’m going to post this link with a caveat. This is a very advanced user taking full advantage of the new iOS 15 features, so what he demonstrates won’t be useful for all people here, but for a certain number of heavy iPadOS users his demonstration of its capabilities will be invaluable.

    Mostly follows the features page on the Apple site, so didn’t find anything entirely new, but a couple of small details were useful.

    Gosh, this is the 45mins of my life I’ll never get back. I personally stopped curating my home screen as if it was a window display so almost everything is just smoke. I remember this kind of customisation being a thing years ago on Android.

    As I said. The video isn’t for everyone. ;)

    Agreed, entirely my fault.

  • johnfromberkeleyjohnfromberkeley
    edited September 2021

    “MAJOR BUG!” …is something I haven’t heard at all.

    Is iPadOS 15 largely working as well as 14.8?

    I have cook lunch for guests tomorrow, so it’s the perfect time to run the upgrade.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @johnfromberkeley said:
    “MAJOR BUG!” …is something I haven’t heard at all.

    Is iPadOS 15 largely working as well as 14.8?

    I have cook lunch for guests tomorrow, so it’s the perfect time to run the upgrade.

    I'm not seeing the big bugs I've seen in prior releases. Some annoyances, but no showstoppers.

  • michael_mmichael_m

    @johnfromberkeley said:
    “MAJOR BUG!” …is something I haven’t heard at all.

    Is iPadOS 15 largely working as well as 14.8?

    I have cook lunch for guests tomorrow, so it’s the perfect time to run the upgrade.

    I only found one, and that is probably due to the app not having any major updates in some time. Other than that everything has run really smoothly.

  • LorichsLorichs

    This might have been mentioned before but these dreaded 3 is only an Ipad thing right?

  • SamuSamu

    @Lorichs said:
    This might have been mentioned before but these dreaded 3 is only an Ipad thing right?

    Yes and even then only visible on apps that support split-view…
    I wouldn’t call it ‘dreaded’ as it really does make multi-tasking a LOT smoother experience.
    (Just wish more apps supported split-view).

    If or when the iPhone gets split-view apps I’m 99.999% sure the 3 dot’s will be there as well 😎

  • AileromAilerom

    What's with the wasted space on the home screen. Spare real estate down left and right side could fit another row of apps.

  • LorichsLorichs

    Thanks @samu. Yeah I welcome improved splitscreen too. It is just the Drambo midi mapping issue that holds me back from updating my Ipad since i like to use Drambo as an AUv3 host in stand alone mode.

  • 0tolerance4silence0tolerance4silence

    @Lorichs said:
    Thanks @samu. Yeah I welcome improved splitscreen too. It is just the Drambo midi mapping issue that holds me back from updating my Ipad since i like to use Drambo as an AUv3 host in stand alone mode.

    Can you tell more about this? Or point to where it’s discussed/reported please?

  • SamuSamu

    @0tolerance4silence said:

    @Lorichs said:
    Thanks @samu. Yeah I welcome improved splitscreen too. It is just the Drambo midi mapping issue that holds me back from updating my Ipad since i like to use Drambo as an AUv3 host in stand alone mode.

    Can you tell more about this? Or point to where it’s discussed/reported please?

    Try the BeepStret forum...
    http://forum.beepstreet.com

    I've not had any issues midi mapping the knobs on my nanoKey Studio in Drambo stand-alone.
    As far as I know there are no 'known' issues with Drambo and iOS15/iPadOS15?!
    (I run the AppStore version on my iPhone 8 and beta on the iPad Air 2 and do tests on both).

    More details would help but those serve a better purpose on the Drambo forum.
    Cheers!

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @michael_m said:

    @johnfromberkeley said:
    “MAJOR BUG!” …is something I haven’t heard at all.

    Is iPadOS 15 largely working as well as 14.8?

    I have cook lunch for guests tomorrow, so it’s the perfect time to run the upgrade.

    I only found one, and that is probably due to the app not having any major updates in some time. Other than that everything has run really smoothly.

    Which app?

Sign In or Register to comment.