On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:40:15 +0100, Chris Cannam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 02 Aug 2004 7:56 am, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > The trick is whether you want to make a sound studio app that will > > be competitive with proprietary solutions like > > Logic/Cubase/Cakewalk. See, they have proved their existence for > > 10-15 years or even more at commercial market. They have solutions > > noone else has. Developers of all those apps have invested money in > > different surveys (technologies, usability etc.). > > I think you overestimate them.
<cut/> Well, what I was trying to say is that there is no need to copy them pixel-to-pixel or byte-to-byte or whatever. Sonar is not a good choice for me. AFAIK it is used mostly by those people who is using ReWire powered synths and samplers. Cubase and Logic have theur own concepts. And yes --- once a user got used to them, (s)he probably won't change it because every other application will work not the way (s)he expects it. It's not about being stuck, it's only about way of thinking ;) But you can always find some nice solutions in both of them which could suite RG's way. Which is what I'm actually talking about :) The only reason I was asking you the question, how often the team uses Cubase/Logic/etc was my curiousity about how well you know what is happening in the world outside open source. From my experience in the open source world (which is 4-5 years only) most of the people who make noise in mailing lists are rather technically minded. Others just use apps or refuse to (if those apps don't suite them). And there is a big difference between a technician, who sometimes experiments with music, and a musician, who writes score for his daily bread and butter ;) E.g. technically minded people do not seem to care about usability issues as long as their work and their salary doesn't depend on it and it usually doesn't depend on Rosegarden's usability, right? :) Kudos to William and other people who are tirelessly bug-reporting and feature-requesting. The reason I mentioned Inkscape is that this application a) has drawn attention by real artists (and not only technically minded people); b) thus it has a large user/tester group. I'd like to stop at a). Why has it drown such an attention by real artists 1. It makes noise: articles everywhere, updates on the website about new features, screenshots, examples -- the whole infrastructure. Openclipart.org as a side project is a big help. 2. It has an open roadmap which shows an idea behind it. You download and install it, you see what it can already do, you look at the roadmap and you you see, what it will do soon. To sum it up: anytime you visit inkscape.org you see progress. You see that there are many people behind it except developers. This is really impressive. This is why amount of Inkscape users grows rapidly. On the other side, Inkscape has a Win32/MAc OS X port, which adds to unix user base a lot. And don't forget: Inkscape has wiki for both users and developers. Wiki is an amazing infrastructure for discussing various solutions (with its cons, of course) -- I have used several wiki engines for last year and I'm still under great impression. > To be honest, to a great extent I feel that it's been a mistake for us > to base our GUI so much on these programs in the first place. > > > for now I see different > > approaches to solution of one problem within Rosegarden in several > > places > > This is certainly true. Part of the problem is that we've often > changed our minds about the best way to do things, so the older and > newer parts of the GUI don't always match! Without the resources to > do work actively tidying things up and connecting the loose ends, > that obviously leads to bad results. Also, I think it is harder to > design things if you are a team of developers who never (or seldom) > actually meet. This internet thing isn't the be-all and end-all. So what about wiki? ;) > Besides, there are many good things about the Rosegarden GUI as well. Yes, there are many things I like in Rosegarden. I hope you understand that I'm not trying to bite you or Rick or Guillame or Silvan :) Rosegarden is now the only MIDI sequencer with audio capabilities for Linux which has notation editor. MusE team dropped it, se24 will never have it, Tim Orford's planned application has no code yet and Tim did'nt show interest in a notation editor, Ardour -- maybe someday. Other sequencers just have died out. Alexandre ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
