Two interesting comments on this thread
"Essentially it was a big interface face for Horizon for those that could not wrap their head around a PC solution for lighting and just HAD to have a board."
I'd be curious to know if Rosco/ET/Strand/Phillips/Whomever sold Horizon AND Marquee for that matter, in anywhere near the numbers of other Strand products, not to mention 600 GrandMA's, 14,000 Express's, 2,000 Expressions, etc... Very doubtful, but the reasons are probably not because it wasn't a good concept.
Probably 99.5% of the lighting world found programming on a "real" lighting desk, far more efficient then anyone's version of a laptop or desktop plus keyboard and mouse.
Not to knock the basic concept, as the idea of an inexpensive sophisticated lighting computer on your laptop was - in theory, a good one. Except when you you've been programming for 8 hrs. and are getting tired of translating the designers syntax to the keyboard shortcuts. Anyone that's used any of the off-line editors much, knows how tiring and prone to error the process can be when punching in lot's of numbers. Thus the obvious advantage of a facepanel with buttons labeled to the syntax the LD talks, not to mention all the other functions that a box with a lot of buttons, whose location and function you learn very quickly, has as an advantage.
"because horizon has capabilities that other boards just simply don't have.."
The Horizon concept, followed by some improvements to the very intriguing ML control concepts as rolled into some of the current Strand desks, are different and better in some respects then the way other desks handle similar functions. But I think the current crop of ETC Eos/Ion desks, as well as the Hog III"s, Gma' I & II's and Vista desks all do a better job these days then the Horizon software did - 10 years ago.
The biggest flaw in the whole Horizon concept, IMO, was the computer OS the software resided on. To me, the thought of running my event on a version of Windows ME (or 95, or 98, or 2000) scared the hell out of me and there was no way I could rationalize that to my Prod. Manager. Far better to have an OS that was locked down and tested by the manufacturer and found to be stable, then to be listening to the chuckles of the computer geeks sitting behind me in the theater as we stared at the Blue Screen of Death !.
"Essentially it was a big interface face for Horizon for those that could not wrap their head around a PC solution for lighting and just HAD to have a board."
I'd be curious to know if Rosco/ET/Strand/Phillips/Whomever sold Horizon AND Marquee for that matter, in anywhere near the numbers of other Strand products, not to mention 600 GrandMA's, 14,000 Express's, 2,000 Expressions, etc... Very doubtful, but the reasons are probably not because it wasn't a good concept.
Probably 99.5% of the lighting world found programming on a "real" lighting desk, far more efficient then anyone's version of a laptop or desktop plus keyboard and mouse.
Not to knock the basic concept, as the idea of an inexpensive sophisticated lighting computer on your laptop was - in theory, a good one. Except when you you've been programming for 8 hrs. and are getting tired of translating the designers syntax to the keyboard shortcuts. Anyone that's used any of the off-line editors much, knows how tiring and prone to error the process can be when punching in lot's of numbers. Thus the obvious advantage of a facepanel with buttons labeled to the syntax the LD talks, not to mention all the other functions that a box with a lot of buttons, whose location and function you learn very quickly, has as an advantage.
"because horizon has capabilities that other boards just simply don't have.."
The Horizon concept, followed by some improvements to the very intriguing ML control concepts as rolled into some of the current Strand desks, are different and better in some respects then the way other desks handle similar functions. But I think the current crop of ETC Eos/Ion desks, as well as the Hog III"s, Gma' I & II's and Vista desks all do a better job these days then the Horizon software did - 10 years ago.
The biggest flaw in the whole Horizon concept, IMO, was the computer OS the software resided on. To me, the thought of running my event on a version of Windows ME (or 95, or 98, or 2000) scared the hell out of me and there was no way I could rationalize that to my Prod. Manager. Far better to have an OS that was locked down and tested by the manufacturer and found to be stable, then to be listening to the chuckles of the computer geeks sitting behind me in the theater as we stared at the Blue Screen of Death !.
Have you tried calling Horizon Tech Support? They are technically discontinues, but the last 3 people I sent that way were able to get what they needed (upgraded licenses and a parallel interface). It is worth a shot.
