On 3/11/2011 11:07 AM, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
> On 03/11/2011 06:40 PM, Tim Mensch wrote:
>> An important feature still missing from Android is low, predictable
>> audio latency.
>> There needs to be an API that will tell you exactly what the latency is,
>> and EVERY device should have a low-latency sound configuration that
>> brings the value to 20ms or lower. The new "low-latency" flag in 2.3
>> guarantees 45ms, which isn't even really low in terms of latency, and as
>> I understand it that feature isn't even available on the Nexus S (!!).
> I do agree with this. But this wouldn't exactly be a new feature. It is about 
> consolidation and optimization, and this what is needed in Android currently. 
> We don't need no new high level features such as OpenSL reverb and the like. 
> Working on all this is a waste of resources in my opinion, when reliable low 
> latency isn't here. We just need good raw input and output, the most basic 
> thing on earth, no bells, no whistles.

I agree that it should be simple, and that it shouldn't need bells and
whistles. BUT, there's no current way at all to query latency, and
there's no access to a low-level audio buffer, so it does in that
respect qualify as a new feature.

Granted they may need to fix and/or optimize their current audio stack
for this to work. Probably the easiest way would be to BYPASS most of it
(including OpenSL ES) to just give us low-level buffer access. But even
that, from our point of view as developers, is a new feature.

What we (or at least most of us) don't want is a lot of additional
bloat; the "feature" I'm talking about could potentially be "added", in
part, by removing code, but in the end there would still be new APIs. :)

Tim

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.

Reply via email to