Submitted 24-Jul-00 by David Walluck:
> I don't need or want ALSA and I'm on x86! I don't know why they are doing
> this! I have an SBLive! which does not sue ALSA, why requre it?? And this
> isn't the only package either, lots of stuff now needs ALSA :(
>
ALSA has one major advantage over OSS and OSS/Free (which your SBLive!
does use): it's genuinely free.
While your particular soundcard has excellent support from the
manufacturer which allows it to use the OSS/Free interface quite
effectively, OSS/Free itself provides only rudimentary support for
many cards. It exists, primarily, as a marketing tool to license more
copies of the better, commercial OSS. (Which for your card would be
superfluous).
But, before dismissing ALSA entirely because it isn't needed for to
get good support for your card, you should consider that the same
driver that you use now, originally provided by Creative, is also
integrated into ALSA. And ALSA generally provides better sound
quality than even the commercial OSS drivers.
That said, perhaps it would be wiser to take advantage od ALSA's OSS
compatibility instead of building support into the packages. We have
already seen at least two packages that had to have alsa support
disabled for various reasons.
It is also important to consider those users who have paid for the
commercial drivers. I know that if I still used the drivers I
purchased, I would be more than a little annoyed at having to install
a second set of drivers that I was not going to use.
So, while I don't necessarily agree with your choice to not use ALSA,
it _is_ your choice and another should not be forced on you.
--
_
_|_|_
( ) * Anton Graham
/v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
/( )X
(m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541
Penguin Powered!
