[LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?
gothmagog at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 8 00:25:19 UTC 2013
> Counter-counter question: why not try and run MS Office, Outlook,
> etc. under Linux ? More choice for the user !
Yep, that would be pretty cool. Difficult, but cool. Does that mean it's not worth putting effort into?
> Any anyway, of those 'tons' maybe 1% provides 'quality', the rest
> isn't any better than what we already have or could have natively.
From: Fons Adriaensen <fons at linuxaudio.org>
To: Michael Bechard <gothmagog at yahoo.com>
Cc: "linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org" <linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2013 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 03:47:44PM -0800, Michael Bechard wrote:
> I'll counter your question with another one; regardless of a
> user's workflow, why *wouldn't* we, as LAD's, want to enable
> as many different kinds of plugins to work on Linux as possible?
> From a user's perspective, having more choice is just better,
> and there are *tons* of quality DSP tools out there in the VST
> format; there's absolutely no down side.
Counter-counter question: why not try and run MS Office, Outlook,
etc. under Linux ? More choice for the user !
Those 'tons' of VST plugins are native Windows ones, they require
an emulated Windows environment just as e.g. Outlook would.
Much easier to use them under Windows, if you really want them.
Any anyway, of those 'tons' maybe 1% provides 'quality', the rest
isn't any better than what we already have or could have natively.
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Linux-audio-dev