[linux-audio-dev] Re: Linux VERSUS OSS ???

[ljp]

On Wednesday 15 October 2003 11:51, Paul Davis wrote:
> >How about docs for the mixer interfaces? or a simple HOWTO.
>
> the mixer interface is a problem. OSS glosses over this by hiding 90%
> of the capabilities of most hardware mixers and stuffing it into an
> incredibly simplified model that then prevents users from doing things
> that they can do under Windows. ALSA messes it up by exporting 90% of
> the capabilities of most hardware mixers into user space and leaving
> the complexity for someone else to deal with :)

well, it might be nice if at least some kind of mixer docs, or mixer HOWTO 
existed, even if things will change in the API...


> takashi and jaroslav are working on the issues. i think their approach
> is correct (export the hardware capabilities, wrap them in alsa-lib to
> provide a simple interface for most apps and users) but it requires
> significant amounts of coding and won't emerge in a few days.
>
> >Alsa/Jack is wonderful, and greatly more flexible than OSS, and is what
> > linux needs to move to more professional recording software, but it does
> > take more lines of code than OSS to do simple things. With OSS, I can
> > have the device opened and playing audio in about 5 lines of code.
>
> assuming that your requirements are met by OSS's incredibly simplistic
> model of an audio device driver. need to control xrun detection? want
> to avoid starting the device until you've got enough data ready? want
> to use non-interleaved access? want to use a sample rate or sample
> format not supported by OSS? well, it won't take 5 lines, or 50 lines
> or 500 lines of code: you simply can't do any of this in OSS.

For very small, simple players, yes, OSS does satisfy the requirements. (think 
embedded devices, with simple user requirements - 44100, 16bit, 2 ch.).

Oss's simplicity is both a boon and it's downfall.