oops, yeah, wrong discussion thread :) I'm a coder too but not at all in linux-audio, although I started designing a few applications (nothing around DSP or linux core system, kernel, etc, this is way beyond my understanding at the moment. FYI, the closest thing to kernel stuff I did lately was patching oss2jack and kfusd so that this rather obsolete tool could run against kernel 2.6.29).
But yes, I wanted to bring a user's point of view to the LAD discussion. About the dual boot, I don't know if it's the best solution but it is certainly a compromise. And one that I would not do myself. I tend to build my own PCs from various components for specific tasks. I find this process cheaper and feel I have a better control over its functioning / etc. About KDE, I am not particularly fond of it, it's just an old habit. I could never get used to gnome although it looks like a fine WM as well. I tried other stuff as well but in the end, I always come back to the shell :) OK, I'll stop the OT blabla. 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 Warden" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 8:05 AM > 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
