[LAD] alsa and OSS (again?)

[Ivica Ico Bukvic]

Pulseaudio is a layer to replace dmix which imho is a good thing. It by no
means negates existence of JACK or ALSA but rather tries to address
inadequacies of dmix/snoop. Look at the pulseaudio site/conference slides
for more info.

Best wishes,

Ico

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-audio-dev-bounces at lists.linuxaudio.org [mailto:linux-audio-
> dev-bounces at lists.linuxaudio.org] On Behalf Of victor
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 5:24 PM
> To: Jay Vaughan; linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org
> Subject: Re: [LAD] alsa and OSS (again?)
> 
> Ok: my next question is, given that a software has native
> alsa support, Jack support, do we need to put some effort into
> adding 1) pulse audio support and 2) OSS support?
> Is that a good idea or is it just a waste of time?
> 
> Victor
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jay Vaughan" <jayv at synth.net>
> To: <linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 1:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [LAD] alsa and OSS (again?)
> 
> 
> >>> Does this mean that pulseaudio is preferred to Jack?
> >>
> >> For desktop and user applications yes, for professional audio no.
> >>
> >
> >
> > There should be no distinction.  The fact that there is, means that
> > the designs are broken.  Audio should just plain work - period.
> >
> > ;
> > --
> > Jay Vaughan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> > Linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org
> > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev