On Freitag 21 Mai 2010, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 05/21/2010 09:26 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Nikos Chantziaras<rea...@arcor.de> wrote: > >> Then why does dmix lag? > >> Then why does dmix lag? > > > > I don't know; I don't care. I don't use dmix, I use PulseAudio, and it > > takes care of everything in user space and I don't have to worry about > > anything. > > > >> I've tried it 6 days ago. Ubuntu 10.04. It's still a laggy, buggy, > >> pile of ****. First thing I did was to disable it. > > > > It doesn't lag here. It's rock solid stable. In all my computers, each > > one with completely different sound hardware. And I'm just using the > > ebuilds from Gentoo; I didn't configure *anything*. I didn't have to. > > > > Maybe Ubuntu has something wrong: Lennart complained that they "didn't > > get it": > > > > http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pa-in-ubuntu.html > > > >> Yes, you and many people also find it acceptable to run their games with > >> 10FPS, or to take their systems 1 minute to boot, etc. > > > > My games doesn't run at 10FPS, my laptop boot in seconds (and usually > > it's always suspended), my desktop and media center (specially the > > latter) boot very quickly also. Please don't speak about something you > > don't know anything about. > > > >> I am not one of those people. I don't like it when the sound lags. You > >> may claim that it doesn't bother you. But you can't claim that it > >> doesn't happen. > > > > I can claim it: it doesn't happen *to me*. It works beautifully. I'm > > using Gentoo, with the following versions: > > > > media-sound/pulseaudio-0.9.21.1 > > sys-kernel/vanilla-sources-2.6.32.9 > > > > My sound card is : > > > > 00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio > > Controller (rev 03) > > > > (I'm on my laptop; don't have the specs of my desktop or media center, > > but the versions at least should be the same). > > > > I simply don't have any sound lags. > > > >> That doesn't mean ALSA is better. > > > > Again, I trust more the technical judgement from the kernel > > developers. No offense. > > > >> Then why don't they fix it? It's still crap after all this time. > > > > It's not in my case. Not at all. But (as I said in my last mail), this > > is Open Source; if you think it's crap, you can try to fix it. > > > > All I'm saying is that PulseAudio is a great sound architecture for > > Linux. It works great for me, in several hardware configurations; and > > in particular in my Media Center, which is my principal medium to > > listen to music. And I trust the judgement of the ones that decided to > > use ALSA+PulseAudio. > > > > Regards. > > All of this boils down to what you should have said in the beginning: > > It works for *you*. > > You don't mind the lag (there is lag, no way around it, you just don't > mind because you're not using software that needs good latency, like > software synthesizers) but I do. So stop trying to convince me that it > works for me too. To use your own words, please don't speak about > something you don't know anything about. As I see it, if I have to use > ALSA's OSS-compatibility to get acceptable results, why not use the real > thing instead?
h,mm, lets see - because oss4 is broken by design? Also, what 'latency' are you talking about?
