<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7264" dir="ltr"><span></span>> Running 2 instance of pd communicating with network socket is very different than using pd/pd~</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7489" dir="ltr"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7288" dir="ltr">Right, but like you said if you have video meeting its deadlines in one process and audio meeting its <br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7532" dir="ltr">deadlines in another process, the pd/pd~ approach should meet the user's needs.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7734" dir="ltr"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7733" dir="ltr">Furthermore pd/pd~ offers a better user experience (i.e., run a single patch and let Pd spawn the 2nd automatically). Given that I'd think most people would be using it for simple divisions of audio/video work, <br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7783" dir="ltr">but messages to the list suggest otherwise. So I'm wondering if the increased cpu usage of pd~ is <br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7832" dir="ltr">significant enough to be driving users to the worse UX in order to get the efficiency.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7833" dir="ltr"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7916" dir="ltr">-Jonathan<br> </div><div class="qtdSeparateBR"><br><br></div><div style="display: block;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7103" class="yahoo_quoted"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7102" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1459999497269_7101" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>