No subject

> If you are referring to the ecosystem that includes the community, then I
> would argue that includes far more than just Linux as a platform.=A0 If y=
ou
> are referring to the OS, then it shouldn't make any difference what other
> OSes this software runs on or doesn't.
>
I agree, it shouldn't. But it does. Not to me, but to the community,
as evidenced by this thread. To me, this is all Nintendo vs. Sega
-esque bickering.

> In other words, what makes any software 'Linux Software' by your
> definition?=A0 Is it that it is Open Source?=A0 Open Source is far more t=
han
> just Linux.=A0 Is it that it runs on Linux?=A0 Well Bitwig apparently run=
s on
> Linux (Supposedly) as do many other closed source programs.
>
By 'Linux software' I meant software that doesn't run on other OS's. I
gave JACK as an example but it was pointed out that it was a crap
example. So let's say something like... [goes through Launcher]...
JACK Rack, or Ingen, or Cinelerra, or Kluppe, or Qtractor... These are
all excellent apps, running only on Linux. These are the programs
which would encourage users to install Linux and become part of the
community/ecosystem. Bitwig and other cross-platform apps are not. If
I'm on a Mac and I buy a Bitwig license, I have the choice of just
installing it and using it, or installing Ubuntu, configuring it,
fighting with drivers and packages, learning a new OS, then using
Bitwig. Of course I'm going to install it on the Mac.

"Linux software" has nothing to do with closed or open source. It has
nothing to do with the community. The vast majority of Linux-only
software must be open source, but that's not my definition. I thought
it was pretty simple.

> Linux is far more than just audio software in general.=A0 Audio Software =
is
> also far more than what you will find on Linux.=A0 I am on Linux because =
I
> prefer it as a platform to run my software on.=A0 I was running Ardour an=
d
> Mixbus on OS X full time for many years (And before that on Linux as well=
)
> but have switched back to Linux not because of the individual software on
> Linux, but because of the platform.

I came from OSX as well, but I'm used to Pro Tools and Logic and
Native Instruments. I'm running Linux because I'm recycling an old
desktop. So it's an experiment. But I wouldn't have signed up to the
mailing list if I wasn't loving it.

> Believe me it literally cost me
> thousands to do so in lost plugins etc.=A0 Appropriate tools to do what I=
 get
> paid to do professionally and make my living off of is what forced me ont=
o
> OS X .=A0 And indeed for some things i am still forced to use OS X or eve=
n a
> VM of Windows, System Design Modeling and Prediction, DSP
> programming(Speaker processing, etc.), System Tuning, etc. all still don'=
t
> have the needed tools available on Linux to match what I need to do and t=
he
> speed I need to do it in in order to continue being paid.=A0 But for audi=
o
> production work, the tools are now at a point on Linux that I feel I can
> come back and even after having lost some plugins that have no replacemen=
t
> on Linux natively, lost access to hardware, and other tools, still
> accomplish my work in at least a comparable amount of time to allow me to
> continue to work and get paid.
>
I now only use the Mac for recording into Pro Tools. All my sounds
come from the Linux box or external sources (ie not computers). I only
use PT because like you I've invested a lot of money in it, but I've
invested a hell of a lot of time in learning shortcuts and so on. I
also have to use Pro Tools the odd time I'm working in studios. I
would say I know Pro Tools really well, and anyone who's used it knows
that it's not the most user-friendly DAW. That's much harder to give
up that the money involved.

> Does this mean I don't care about open source?=A0 Not at all, if I didn't=
 I
> would probably have stayed on OS X with Logic, DP, PT, or one of the many
> other solutions.=A0 This is entirely to point out that Linux as the Platf=
orm,
> Open Source as the Ecosystem, and Software as the Tools are three complet=
ely
> different topics, and should be treated as such.=A0 As a result I am prob=
ably
> on the same side as Alexandre and see this coming to Linux not as a bad
> thing that will destroy the ecosystem.=A0 Just that the ecosystem will
> change.=A0 How?=A0 Who knows, but we will find out.
>
Then we completely agree and I don't feel picked on ;)

To go back to the Nintendo vs Sega comparison, I was a Nintendo kid.
But I didn't tell my friend his Mega Drive (Genesis) sucked because of
the audio DSP chip, or the graphics raster engine, or the gamepad
ergonomics. His Mega Drive sucked because he couldn't play Super Mario
Kart or Starwing on it.

I'm hopefully a little more mature now, and not really interested in a
Linux vs Mac vs Windows rabble, but the fact is that any OS is defined
by its software more than anything else. You could have the best OS in
the world, running at a bazillion gigaflops on 10 year old hardware,
but if there's only a dozen people using it and all it can do is
spreadsheets and solitaire, I'm probably not interested. The platform,
software and community are all part of the package when you invest in
a new OS. And cross-platform software has zero impact on that.

> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Seablade

-A