Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Paul Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Paul, honestly. I can't explain why they haven't even *tried* to install linux with jack and ardour. If i were them i'd at *least* track the You have inadequate knowledge of the history here Marek. RME were actually very keen on demoing Ardour 4 years ago! They wanted to show it at trade shows. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to figure why they might be less inclined to spend time on it these days. Why are they less inclined? Wolfgang
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
If 50 persons say Please would you be so kind ... And another 50 say FY, in the end it's the number that counts. 100 (potential) customers. Each one of use is responsioble for his *own* statements. Sorry, maybe we're from different planets, but i can't follow. Your attitude is disgusting - i'd call it sociopathic. best future, Thomas
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Word of the Day for Wednesday January 14, 2004 obstreperous \uhb-STREP-uhr-uhs; ob-\, adjective: 1. Noisily and stubbornly defiant; unruly. 2. Noisy, clamorous, or boisterous. On ons, 2004-12-01 at 18:44 -0600, Jan Depner wrote: That's the word of the day. Tomorrow we'll try obsequious ;-) Jan On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 18:18, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 06:12:40PM -0600, Jan Depner wrote: I also asked you to not be so obstreperous in your posts. ^ I really love the sound of that word, but it will cost me a new dictionary. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=obsequious
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Fons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 06:12:40PM -0600, Jan Depner wrote:
I also asked you to not be so obstreperous in your posts.
^
I really love the sound of that word, but it will cost me
a new dictionary.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
Obstreperous \Ob*streper*ous\, a. [L. obstreperus, from
obstrepere to make a noise at; ob (see {Ob-}) + strepere to
make a noise.]
Attended by, or making, a loud and tumultuous noise;
clamorous; noisy; vociferous. ``The obstreperous city.''
--Wordsworth. ``Obstreperous approbation.'' --Addison.
Beating the air with their obstreperous beaks. --B.
Jonson.
-- {Ob*streper*ous*ly}, adv. -- {Ob*streper*ous*ness}, n.
--
CYa,
Mario
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Jan Depner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 16:37, Dave Robillard wrote: On Tue, 2004-30-11 at 17:43 -0500, Lee Revell wrote: No one said they were good. I just said it was better than no support at all, and whatever RME decides to do, they designed the hardware, it's THEIR CHOICE. No, it's not better than no support at all. No support doesn't destroy Linux in the long run. Try to think on a little wider scale than getting one silly little sound card to work in your specific (x86, running a supported version of the Linux kernel) computer. There are more important things than trivial convenience for a small subset of Linux users (at the expense of all the other ones) you know. My problem is a whole lot more important than 1 silly little sound card. As I said before, somewhere around 200 Linux systems with NVIDIA cards and the proprietary driver. The more important things you speak of are important to you but not to me. I don't belong to your church. Without that church, you wouldn't have any Linux to use at all. Feels a bit like stone-throwing in the glass-house to me. -- CYa, Mario
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer how much longer?
Am i the only one that thinks maybe this should come to an end at some point? How about those who would like to get a firewire interface contribute cash to the group of wonderful LAD designers/ElecEng types keen on making the ultimate open firewire interface and we can all be contented with open drivers and hardware and actually get back to making some music? Maybe when it is designed you can suggest to audioscience that they can make it? They get all the basic design done for them, and a new and exciting product, everyone gets to buy a firewire interface that works and everyone is happy. Eyes seem to be focused on firewire now, we still have probs with usb, well at least my griffin imic and some others don't do full duplex with alsajack(only ossjack). I really would like some slightly more musically related discussion on here, i.e what synth are missing, what features need to be developed so x can make y easier with z, etc. Quite often i just love a synth that does a simp! le job and does it well, ie a TB303(maybedevilfish mod ;p) emulation, a decent drum synth (coming very, very soon), etc and just getting together and making some tunes would be great. (for instance http://wrstud.urz.uni-wuppertal.de/~ka0394/en/loop_soup/) I think sometimes we seem to miss the point of actually making music with this stuff... Loki - Strike another match, go start anew And it's all over now, Baby Blue.
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer how much longer?
ka0394/en/loop_soup/) I think sometimes we seem to miss the point of actually making music with this stuff... wrong list. this is LAD, not LAU. here we like to focus on the real point: dreaming of making music as inspiration for writing thousands of lines of code :) --p
[linux-audio-dev] Doing the soundcard manufacturer tango (long)
Greetings: As I skim over the various messages regarding Marek's tribulations, first with RME, then with apparently the entire LA* community, I started thinking that there was some basic flaw in the whole thing. After some reflection, a few thoughts on the matter: Frankly, who gives a a flying fsck what gear you're using ? I'm *far* more interested in what you're doing with it than who makes it, whether it's pro audio gear, if it's the latest trend, or even if it's The Future (TM Disney Corp., I'm sure) of audio technology throughout the known universe. There seems to be this prevailing fear motif that somehow if we don't have firewire or whatever that we will somehow become disabled as musicians and kept forever from creating and recording good music. What a lot of horse hockey. Over and over again we see/hear artists who do their work on whatever's available, making it work because for them it has to work, they have no choice. Early rappers single-handedly revived a slew of vintage drum machines and synths, the Seattle punkers said No thanks! to the technical indulgences of the big-hair guitarists of the 80s, returning to the *song* as the logical focus of a rock band, and if I had to make the point further I'd bring up Conlon Nancarrow and Harry Partch. Geez, people, stop talking and start singing ! Where's Marek's Blues or The RME Fight Song ?? Come on, the talent's here, we know it is. And I've never heard a single normal listener say anything like Wow, they really knew how to use [Pro Tools, Cubase, Ardour] on that song!. I think we're barking up the wrong tree. Maybe letters to manufacturers make a difference, but I'll bet one successful song will do more to attract manufacturers and users to Linux. Even touting numbers isn't nearly so effective an attention-getter as would be a single successful recording. And by successful I mean that it reaches tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Then during the interviews you can say Ja, I used Linux, ya know, it's da bomb... We're also still missing the potential in the academic scene. Professors and researchers also have pull, and if they can be convinced to use Linux in their audio labs, they can also bring pressure on manufacturers to provide them with drivers et cetera. Plus, a great deal of hardware work could probably be done at university level, they have the resources. The home recording market is another potentially powerful force. In other words, no change will come from the high end, because there's simply no incentive. Large studios have money for state-of-the-art equipment and software, they're all scrambling to stay ahead of the competition (because there isn't really very much of it) by having what the other guys don't, and there's just no reason for them to even take an interest in anything other than what they know or are told to know via Mix magazine. So, no market for Linux there, sorry, not at this moment in time. But the home studios and smaller scale pro studios are more budget-minded, ditto for academic studios. Lots of possibility there, lots of people, lots of potential pressure on manufacturers to stand up and notice the movement around them. But we won't reach them by writing messages on mail-lists, we'll reach them by showing them what can be done. It's often overlooked how incredibly conservative the whole industry really is. Innovative trends like Linux may be perceived more as disruptive than smoothly continuing things as we've always known and liked them to be, especially to the higher-level professional studios. Mark, I'll buy you a case of Iron City Light if Digi ever decides to support Linux in any way. It's just not in their best interest to do so. They have created a locked-in market as completely as M$ has done, even moreso because of the narrow market base. They'll continue to eke out their innovations to keep them ahead of their competitors and they'll continue their so-far successful policy of keeping everything closed. I think it's important to note that such companies are not necessarily hostile to their user-base, they simply have the power to define that base and they'll do everything in their power to maintain the lock-in. It's how they're making their money now, it's been working for them for many years, and there seems to be no pressing reason for them to change. So, what to do ? Well, AudioScience has a developer who could perhaps persuade his company that there's a growing market for high-end pro-audio cards for Linux, and his company could literally corner the market for a while simply by providing either their own open-source drivers or by giving the specs to the community and letting the ALSA and OSS guys do the driver dance. There's already been some exchange, but perhaps a little more concerted community effort in that direction can help ? Ivica has been working on new ways to promote Linux audio software in
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Doing the soundcard manufacturer tango (long)
Mark, I'll buy you a case of Iron City Light if Digi ever decides to support Linux in any way. It's just not in their best interest to do so. careful with them thar words Dave! you may not know that Digi already has a very expensive product out that is entirely based around Linux and GPL'ed software. They didn't write it, they bought the (German) company that did. --p
Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] Doing the soundcard manufacturer tango (long)
Paul Davis wrote: Mark, I'll buy you a case of Iron City Light if Digi ever decides to support Linux in any way. It's just not in their best interest to do so. careful with them thar words Dave! you may not know that Digi already has a very expensive product out that is entirely based around Linux and GPL'ed software. They didn't write it, they bought the (German) company that did. Okay, okay, I'll buy the case *and* drink it... :)
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 09:14 -0600, Jan Depner wrote: If things keep going the way you seem to think is perfectly fine, the whole damn kernel will be proprietary. I've said it before and I'll say it again - we already have a totally closed, single architechture, buggy POS operating system. Why must you advocate turning Linux into one too? Obviously losing your grasp on reality here - Linux is GPLed. You can't make it proprietary. I'd rather not have to put in practise at the end of every sentence in my email, assuming any even remotely intelligent person (such as yourself) would be able to figure out what I mean without a 400 word explanatory paragraph. A free operating system isn't very useful if you can't run it. In a couple years, when those 200 linux systems are absolutely useless because Nvidia doesn't care about you anymore, maybe then you'll learn. In a couple of years those Linux systems will be obsolete as all computer systems are in a couple of years. Don't worry, as Linux continues to gain ground you'll see more and more companies jumping on the bandwagon. I think you just want everything now - you must be fairly young. How can you be so sure? What makes you think Linux will become more popular? If everything starts going proprietary it will have all the same problems as Windows (architechture specific, vendor lock-in, no way to fix problems, at the mercy of some other company, etc). In which case a lot of the reasons for using Linux in the first place are gone, and it's popularity will fade accordingly. And in 5 years those computers will be capable of doing the same things they are now. Are they useless now? No. Then they won't be useless in 5 years. Not all of us have infinite resources of money to buy shiny new computers for every task. I don't want to spend $3000 for a gateway when I already have a machine that is (far) more than adequate for the job. My computer right now can record a whole lot of tracks simultaneously in realtime. That's a pretty useful task, and a better computer isn't needed for it.. I don't recall recording a session with 38,000,000 musicians, and I'd say it's a pretty safe bet I won't ever have to. Obsolete is a useless term in this context. -DR-
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:28:21AM -0500, Dave Robillard wrote: My computer right now can record a whole lot of tracks simultaneously in realtime. That's a pretty useful task, and a better computer isn't needed for it.. I don't recall recording a session with 38,000,000 musicians, and I'd say it's a pretty safe bet I won't ever have to. Obsolete is a useless term in this context. For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. -- FA
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't need the fastest graphics performance I really need the fastest 3d performance, but I won't sacrifice my freedom for it. I would pay a months paycheck for some juicy 3d chip as long as it's usable to me. -- Esben Stien is [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.esben-stien.name irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact [sip|iax]:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 13:52, Thomas Grill wrote: If 50 persons say Please would you be so kind ... And another 50 say FY, in the end it's the number that counts. 100 (potential) customers. Each one of use is responsioble for his *own* statements. Sorry, maybe we're from different planets, but i can't follow. Your attitude is disgusting - i'd call it sociopathic. That's exactly what i was trying to avoid. Next time you offend someone better read the post you're repliying to.
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 17:00, Esben Stien wrote: Marek Peteraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: perhaps if more and more ATI customers went for their older cards, they'd certainly be forced to rethink their policy. That's what I did. I've been waiting for years to get a new 3d chip, going to dri.sf.net many times a week (for years). I've had this g550 based card since I switched from a g400. With the release of the rv280 chip, I could'nt take it any more, I just needed to get it. It's the most powerful chip you can get with free software. I would never run proprietary software on my computer. Me and that world waved goodbye. My friend, richeros, did the same. We both bought the ATI 9250. I'm going to do this aswell(still stuck with g400). Thanks for inspiring me. Marek
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 02 December 2004 01:18, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 06:12:40PM -0600, Jan Depner wrote: I also asked you to not be so obstreperous in your posts. ^ I really love the sound of that word, but it will cost me a new dictionary. That'll be cheap, it's in wordnet :-) - - Burkhard - -- Libre Audio, Libre Video, Libre Software: www.AGNULA.org Public key available here: http://blackhole.pca.dfn.de:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xFD82303B key FP 0A65 5E83 F44F 47A5 3DFC 19C5 7779 E411 FD82 303B -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBrpgfd3nkEf2CMDsRAqFsAJ9BXF/X5chYeZPzg2Yvogmx2dN5/gCgujXF TErJmaiusfLEBU0hRimfMto= =lTmR -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 08:00, Esben Stien wrote: Marek Peteraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: perhaps if more and more ATI customers went for their older cards, they'd certainly be forced to rethink their policy. That's what I did. I've been waiting for years to get a new 3d chip, going to dri.sf.net many times a week (for years). I've had this g550 based card since I switched from a g400. With the release of the rv280 chip, I could'nt take it any more, I just needed to get it. It's the most powerful chip you can get with free software. I would never run proprietary software on my computer. Me and that world waved goodbye. My friend, richeros, did the same. We both bought the ATI 9250. Hey! I did not know about the 9250... do you have a pointer with information on it? Thanks. -- Fernando
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey! I did not know about the 9250... do you have a pointer with information on it? You mean the rv280 chip?. No, I'm not able to use it to much. Need a couple of more years programming if I'm going to make my own driver;). The card of course is easily found on google. It's like opening a closet with toys that reach the ceiling. -- Esben Stien is [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.esben-stien.name irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact [sip|iax]:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
Eliot Blennerhassett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: we at audioscience I will certainly put my eyes on audioscience now. Having a company working so close with the community is really great. -- Esben Stien is [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.esben-stien.name irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact [sip|iax]:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[linux-audio-dev] Audio over ethernet (deja vu)
(You are not seeing double. I posted twice: once for midi and once for audio.. %) Has anyone got working code that reads/writes audio over ethernet with a /dev or alsa interface? Even better would be a solution that has support on the MacOS and Windows side. We'd like to integrate that technology into Receptor (http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_overview.php) and our marketing guys want to show something at NAMM (that's January!). We might be able to shake loose some shekels if there is some code that's close but needs some tweaks. Cheers... mo === Michael Ost, Software Architect Muse Research, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME isno more]
To my humble knowledge 1394 is a bus system with each of the participants being initator and receipient. So why not analyze an interface's protocol by simply inserting a (Linux-)PC between the Windows-PC running the driver and the firewire interface, which acts as a thru-device and protocols everything going win - firewire device ? For someone with better knowledge on 1394 than me it should be a possible to get the protocol that way on a rainy weekend. My two cents, Ralf
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Alfons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is changed much more often than hardware. Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution, maybe by providing a compatibility interface in your new system. You can't expect others to pay for the consequences of your decisions. A manufacturer will adapt to a new system if that is in his interest, otherwise not. I work in space telecoms. Some of the systems we deliver we have to keep operational (by contract) for sometimes up to 15 years. I can assure you this is *extremely* expensive, and of course the customer has to pay for it. In one case we had to put all sources, hardware design files, all tools, the operating systems, licences and computers required to run them in escrow at a third party, to be released to the customer in case we would no longer support him. Any idea how much he payed for that ? -- FA
Re: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] Doing the soundcard manufacturer tango (long)
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 17:47, Dave Phillips wrote: Marek Peteraj wrote: Geez, people, stop talking and start singing ! Where's Marek's Blues or The RME Fight Song ?? Come on, the talent's here, we know it is. unfortunately i don't have a gear to record with. Really ? No soundcard at all ? No microphone, not even a crappy tape recorder ? No way to write down some words to send to someone who does have a soundcard and a microphone ? The right software shouldn't be too hard to find... Oh yeah, there's windows and plenty of sw that i can use with my excellent fireface. ;) Anyway, this is OT for LAD, sorry. And I have work to do, two new songs to record with Ardour and an article to complete by this evening. No time for love, Doctor Jones.. Is it an article about linux audio? Because then, according to your own words, why write about it, who would care anyway... And of course, i apologize for bothering. Dr. Jones
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 21:02, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Alfons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is changed much more often than hardware. Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution, which in case of an opensource driver would be to change a code here and there to make it work... maybe by providing a compatibility interface in your new system. You can't expect others to pay for the consequences of your decisions. A manufacturer will adapt to a new system if that is in his interest, otherwise not. Paul, Jan, Fons, and others. I believe that you should switch your software to proprietary and make a living out of it. Because in that case your reasoning would be perfectly valid. Marek
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Midi over ethernet
Last week, I played with m-dist, a bootable Linux CD setup to demo IEEE P1639 (D-MIDI), which is MIDI over Ethernet - m-dist has it setup with alsa-midi. It seemed to work fine. http://www.plus24.com/m-dist/ I believe the source is available on the author's site under software: http://www.plus24.com/ieeep1639/ There seems to be a Mac OS X version too, but I haven't checked it out myself. Richard At 01:39 PM 12/2/2004, you wrote: Has anyone got working code that reads/writes midi over ethernet with a /dev or alsa-midi interface? Even better would be a solution that has support on the MacOS and Windows side. We'd like to integrate that technology into Receptor (http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_overview.php) and our marketing guys want to show something at NAMM (that's January!). We might be able to shake loose some shekels if there is some code that's close but needs some tweaks. Cheers... mo === Michael Ost, Software Architect Muse Research, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 21:02 +0100, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Alfons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is changed much more often than hardware. Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution [snip] Exactly, *you* should have the ability to actually find that solution for *your* system. Proprietary drivers take this ability away from you, so in that situation.. *you* are screwed. Nobody ever said the manufacturer should be responsible for supporting any and all new configurations - that's riduclous. The entire point is they /shouldn't/ be responsible, so people aren't at their mercy. ATI is almost certainly not going to write a driver for my Radeon for whatever incarnation of X we're using in 5 years. Will it work however? Absolutely. It's essentially a guarantee, given the ease of converting the existing (XFree) driver to other frameworks. Sounds like you've switched sides, Fons. -DR-
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 23:23 +0100, Marek Peteraj wrote: On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 21:02, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Alfons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is changed much more often than hardware. Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution, which in case of an opensource driver would be to change a code here and there to make it work... maybe by providing a compatibility interface in your new system. You can't expect others to pay for the consequences of your decisions. A manufacturer will adapt to a new system if that is in his interest, otherwise not. Paul, Jan, Fons, and others. I believe that you should switch your software to proprietary and make a living out of it. Because in that case your reasoning would be perfectly valid. Marek Marek! Come on.. I'm sure you're trying to prove some point, but nothing good can possibly come from suggesting people switch their projects over to a proprietary licensing scheme. I, for one, greatly appreciate the contributions of the above to the world of free audio software - regardless of what opinions they may (or may not) have about proprietary hardware drivers in Linux. There is exactly one way to further the advancement of Free Software - write it. A line of code is worth a million words. -DR-
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 23:47, Dave Robillard wrote: On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 23:23 +0100, Marek Peteraj wrote: On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 21:02, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Alfons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source driver will still work in 5 years. Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is changed much more often than hardware. Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution, which in case of an opensource driver would be to change a code here and there to make it work... maybe by providing a compatibility interface in your new system. You can't expect others to pay for the consequences of your decisions. A manufacturer will adapt to a new system if that is in his interest, otherwise not. Paul, Jan, Fons, and others. I believe that you should switch your software to proprietary and make a living out of it. Because in that case your reasoning would be perfectly valid. Marek Marek! Come on.. I'm sure you're trying to prove some point, but nothing good can possibly come from suggesting people switch their projects over to a proprietary licensing scheme. I, for one, greatly appreciate the contributions of the above to the world of free audio software - regardless of what opinions they may (or may not) have about proprietary hardware drivers in Linux. Me too. But it seems as if they wouldn't do themselves. That was my point. I think that at some point it has become disrespectful for companies to ignore linux. So i can't really understand people(oss users or even oss developers) who try to defend the position of companies that make their lives harder for no reason. I'm just trying to point out that they should be more proud of their work which if wasn't oss, could be: 1. a well marketed proprietary money-machine 2. valuable IP, treated as tradesecret and protected under the terms of business law and IP law. So it would be the same thing basically. And i really tried to clarify why there should be no fear in providing opensource drivers, providing a brief analysis and concrete examples. Seems that i completely failed in what i was trying to achieve. Better luck next time. ;) I'd give it one more chance and post a 'rme - take action' letter to lad and lau which would encourage people to go to the rme forum, tell them that their using their hw, what kind of hw they have purchased and that they would continue to do so in the future. But i fear that a lot of people would just ignore it, thinking to themselves 'my vote doesn't count, they will ignore it anyway, it's a waste of time, there's just 5 of us' or similar. I might be wrong. If somebody wants to encourage me in doing this i'd be glad to do it. I'd also encourage to write polite letters if that's what suits the majority here ;) If we'd achieve a fairly large number - say 100, the consequences would be either: - RME reconsidering their decision - raising interest of all the RME customers in linux audio, because virtually everyone there is able to try it out on a professional level. Except the fireface users(minority still, since it's a new device). which if successful, would most likely bring RME to reconsider their postion anyway. Which seems that it should be in our interest to do so. It's not much effort anyway. If not, tell me, and i'll shut up. ;) Marek
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Audio over ethernet (deja vu)
On Thursday 02 December 2004 01:41 pm, Michael Ost wrote: (You are not seeing double. I posted twice: once for midi and once for audio.. %) Has anyone got working code that reads/writes audio over ethernet with a /dev or alsa interface? Even better would be a solution that has support on the MacOS and Windows side. Define working. I have some code (not mine) implemented as a ladspa plugin that streams audio over ethernet with low latency. I have to get around to either fixing a sticky template or excising the corba related discovery code. The original author sez broadcasting will work, but I was going to hard code IP addies for testing. We'd like to integrate that technology into Receptor (http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_overview.php) and our marketing guys want to show something at NAMM (that's January!). We might be able to shake loose some shekels if there is some code that's close but needs some tweaks. Cheers... mo === Michael Ost, Software Architect Muse Research, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Behringer
On December 2, 2004 06:35 pm, Marek Peteraj wrote: snip Me too. But it seems as if they wouldn't do themselves. That was my point. I think that at some point it has become disrespectful for companies to ignore linux. So i can't really understand people(oss users or even oss developers) who try to defend the position of companies that make their lives harder for no reason. I believe that problem here is that many of us understand that it is not arbitrary and that there are in fact potentially good reasons for their decisions. I may not agree with nor particularly like Nvidia or RME, but I can understand some of the complexities they face. Likewise I have needs to be met, if that means that buying Nvidia then I must buy an Nvidia video card. If you do not have such constraints (it sounds like many of us do) then you are in an enviable position. To ridicule everyone who does not make the same choices as you is pointless and naive. I'm just trying to point out that they should be more proud of their work which if wasn't oss, could be: 1. a well marketed proprietary money-machine 2. valuable IP, treated as tradesecret and protected under the terms of business law and IP law. So it would be the same thing basically. And i really tried to clarify why there should be no fear in providing opensource drivers, providing a brief analysis and concrete examples. Seems that i completely failed in what i was trying to achieve. I am not sure that providing opensource drivers is risk free, and I am a huge proponent of oss. You do not sound like a lawyer, so to say that there should be no fear in providing opensource drivers is premature optimism. Most of the world (including the USA) still has to sort this issue out. Better luck next time. ;) I'd give it one more chance and post a 'rme - take action' letter to lad and lau which would encourage people to go to the rme forum, tell them that their using their hw, what kind of hw they have purchased and that they would continue to do so in the future. But i fear that a lot of people would just ignore it, thinking to themselves 'my vote doesn't count, they will ignore it anyway, it's a waste of time, there's just 5 of us' or similar. I might be wrong. If somebody wants to encourage me in doing this i'd be glad to do it. I'd also encourage to write polite letters if that's what suits the majority here ;) Politeness is almost always a better approach to get what you want. If we'd achieve a fairly large number - say 100, the consequences would be either: - RME reconsidering their decision - raising interest of all the RME customers in linux audio, because virtually everyone there is able to try it out on a professional level. Except the fireface users(minority still, since it's a new device). which if successful, would most likely bring RME to reconsider their postion anyway. The number of interested people is not the only factor in RME's decision. I would be surprised if a mere 100 people would have any impact at all. This is not to say that I do not support such efforts, just be a little more realistic with the expectations. Which seems that it should be in our interest to do so. It's not much effort anyway. If not, tell me, and i'll shut up. ;) For whats it worth, I am in the market for some new gear, RMEs decision colours my perspective and buying choices. As such I will be making my voice heard on their board and in the end will vote with my wallet. pgp7NXpwcrhOQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
