On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 15:24, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Wed, 29.07.09 06:48, Jeff Garzik ([email protected]) wrote: > > > > > > > > Karel Zak wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:07:32PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >>> On Tue, 28.07.09 15:48, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote: > > >>> Yes. You cannot select them as record source, you cannot mute or > > >>> unmute them, you cannot change their volume. "CD", "PC Speaker", > > >>> "MIDI" and so on are just obsolete. > > >> > > >> This reminds me your note: > > >> > > >> > https://tango.0pointer.de/pipermail/pulseaudio-discuss/2009-July/004519.html > > >> > > >> PA does not make use of hardware mixing. And I don't plan to > change > > >> that. It's obsolete technology. CPUs these days come with > extensions > > >> such as MMX or SSE precisely for speeding up DSP tasks such as PCM > > >> mixing. This is way more flexible that hw mixing, and definitely > the > > >> way to the future, both on the desktop and on embedded envs as > well. > > >> > > >> > > >> The "obsolete technology" -- who made this decision? Is it your > private > > >> opinion or any suggestion from sound card manufacturers? > > >> > > >> It seems that HW companies still produce the "obsolete technology". > > > > > > Quite agreed [says a former kernel audio driver maintainer], and I will > > > go even farther: > > > > Maybe since the times you worked on audio drivers the design of the > > sound cards changed a little and stuff like SSE became largely available? > > > > > It is completely stupid to waste host CPU on a task that can be > > > offloaded in parallel to dedicated audio hardware. > > > > > > If the user intentionally purchased expensive audio hardware with nice > > > hardware mixing, do not subvert the user's intentions by ignoring such > > > nice hardware. > > > > > > Any developer who claims "always use software mixing" or "always use > > > hardware mixing" is a young, inexperienced fool. There are valid > > > situations for both choices. > > > > Hear hear, Mr. Garzik is the the old experienced wise man of audio, > > who knows so much more about audio than any of the audio guys at > > Microsoft or Apple. > > It's quite hypocritical of you to use an "anti-open-source" company > (Creative) as an argument for not supporting hw mixing on one side > and then touting other "anti-open-source" companies as examples to > follow on the other. > > But whatever. Just please stop imposing pulseaudio on those who don't > want to use it. For the record, I'm still considering leaving Fedora > because - as a GNOME desktop - it's becoming unusable without pulseaudio. > Making it a hard dependency for GNOME bluetooth stack in F11 went a bit > too far in my opinion. > > Regards, > R. > This is supported by the zillions of forum messages asking how to fix or remove pulseaudio. Not to mention the billion post thread here on devel. -- projecthuh.com All of my bits are free, are yours? Fedoraproject.org
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
