I dunno if you're a coder too, but those words you wrote are the words of a user :).
By the way I'm a fan of extremes, I like KDE (only with KWin) ex 3.5.9 and Ion2, but actually I'm running GNOME and this also has is advantages and disadvantages. Do you agree that a dual or multi boot might be the best solution to fit to all needs? I would interpret your mail this way. You didn't blame any sound server, but you make out for which usage you are fine with which sound server. Am I wrong? The 'palm pre' thread is uncoupled from the origin thread, that's why I guess it's okay to speak about user needs here, nobody will disturb any technical expert knowledge discussion at the original thread. By the way, an rt-audio distro like 64 Studio often works OOB for rt-audio too, not for my hardware, but it is made to fit to many hardware combinations. Thank you for reporting your experiences. Cheers, Ralf James Warden wrote: > Just a small comment, and then I shut up: > > the great thing about linux is its flexibility. I have a few boxes at home > doing different things: > - a multimedia server based on mythtv, NFS and samba > - a powerful DAW running an RT patched kernel > - a couple of laptops for AOB (any other business) > > For the AOB laptops, it was nice not to do anything once I installed the > distro. Things worked OOB, and that was it. > > For the DAW or multimedia server, that was another story ... but simply > because customized systems require, well, customization. The all-in-one > distro is and I think will remain a utopia. > > This said, I recently upgraded my DAW to KDE 4.2 (was 3.5.9 before upgrade) > and that automatically installed pulseaudio. I had already fiddled around > with pulseaudio about a year ago due to my using VirtualBox (another story). > I found pulse's features kinda cool and I quickly understood it was not meant > as a replacement or alternative to Jack. > > As of today, my DAW has pulseaudio installed. But all I had to do was: > - open the KDE system settings > - disable ALL sound stuff I could find > > So basically, KDE offered me the possibility to not interact at all with the > sound layer. It was obviously not a default setting but it was just a few > clicks away. > > So let me be straight: it should remain like that. > > On average, a user installing e.g. KDE will expect desktop sounds to work > (sound notifications, mp3 players, DVD playback, what-not). That's not what I > want in my DAW at all but being myself an old linux "power user", I knew that > it would do that (experience with artsd). I mean, how could the KDE > installation possibly know that it was to be running on a DAW ?! :D > I am glad the desktop config interface allowed me to configure it the way I > wanted (no extra special services in the background, no sound system other > than what I want for my DAW). > > Now, if things were to change (no longer the possibility to configure e.g. > KDE the way I want), I would definitely feel pissed-off and complain on some > mailing lists. But let's be also clear: pulseaudio is definitely NOT the > worst things that could happen. It works fine on my laptops, I don't need to > do anything about it and that's what it was intended for: a generic and > multifeatured desktop sound system. But desktops are also used in other > contexts (e.g. DAW) and it would really be wise to keep desktop components > _optional_ (not only sound system but also visual effects, etc). That's just > simple wisdom and i suggest we keep it that way. The same applies to jack. It > is a highly specialized tool and should remain so. > > > OK, time to disappear from this discussion. > > Cheers, > J. > > > --- On Wed, 6/24/09, Ralf Mardorf <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> From: Ralf Mardorf <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on thedesktop >> by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!] >> To: "james morris" <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 6:45 AM >> james morris wrote: >> >>> On 24/6/2009, "Patrick Shirkey" <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>> It would be helpful if things that could make a >>>> >> big impact will >> >>>> continued to be discussed within the LAD >>>> >> community. However this is a >> >>>> difficult situation. No matter if the discussions >>>> >> are starting prior to >> >>>> implementation or post implementation the general >>>> >> direction of the >> >>>> arguments tend to be quite emotional. >>>> >>>> Is it just because audio guys have a bit more >>>> >> artistic temperament than >> >>>> most other developers? >>>> >>>> >>> I don't think this adds much to what has been stated >>> >> by Fons and others, >> >>> but perhaps it explains a little? >>> >>> I'm not a hardcore audio developer like most of the >>> >> guys here, but I've >> >>> been making audio/music/noise, and coding, since the >>> >> days of 486sx25s >> >>> and windows 3.1. Back then, and for many years after, >>> >> it was a real >> >>> concern to be able to disable as many irrelevant (to >>> >> audio) processes in >> >>> the system as possible (as I'm sure you're aware). >>> >>> Now I have a pretty capable system, but when I want to >>> >> run RT audio apps >> >>> I still want to disable as many irrelevant processes >>> >> on the system as I >> >>> can. >>> >>> For this reason I really dislike the big monolithic >>> >> desktop environments. >> >>> There are several applications tied into them (some >>> >> serious, plain >> >>> useful, or just fun) which I'd love to have working >>> >> but which force me >> >>> to install all sorts of software I really don't want >>> >> or need - along >> >>> with all sorts of processes running in the >>> >> background. >> >>> So it feels a bit freedom eroding. The choice seems to >>> >> be between a >> >>> system which 'just works' but which wastes system >>> >> resources on things >> >>> I don't want, or a system which I have to spend hours >>> >> setting up, >> >>> constantly have to deal with the idiosyncrasies of, >>> >> but which is as fast >> >>> and powerful as it could be. >>> >>> The notions of old, to raise the potential for system >>> >> resources to be >> >>> only used for the job at hand (ie audio) are still >>> >> strongly rooted and >> >>> people don't like it when they feel their freedom to >>> >> use systems in >> >>> this way is threatened by forcing them to install >>> >> software and have >> >>> running processes they don't want. >>> >>> James. >>> >> I guess (if needed) separating rt and bread-and-butter >> Linux by having a >> dual-boot is an acceptable solution. A user with nearly no >> knowledge >> could install a comfortable distro for the everyday desktop >> environment >> and another for real-time usage. Even if somebody don't >> have any trouble >> with his Linux install, he might wish to have a safe Linux >> for >> productions and another Linux to have fun and fun sometimes >> means to >> risk things, you won't risk for a installation that needs >> to be stable >> all the time, that's why a dual-boot has also an advantage, >> if there >> will be a joint venture for distro/ desktop developers and >> rt >> hardliners. I have a bad mobo and for rt e.g. I need to set >> irq priority >> for especially the one port where the MIDI is connected to. >> I don't >> think things like that should be done by the desktop >> environment. This >> seems to be impossible. >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-audio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > > -- Secret of Tux: http://images.wallaceandgromit.com/user_uploads/forum_thumbnails/5/75/355.jpg "Gromit bit me" says HMV dog: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_03/GomitHMVPA_468x319.jpg _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
