[LAU] Re: DAW usability

[Dave Robillard]

On Thu, 2007-14-06 at 03:23 -0400, carmen wrote:
> >  And yes, I must admit I have a small agenda too, against Ardour. I don't 
> >  think ardour's user interface is very efficient [1]. Ardour is great, but it 
> 
> why hasnt ardour been fixed. is it because the GUI is written in C++ with GnomeCanvas or something and only 2 people now how its written and theyre both too busy to do anything about the TODO list? ive never needed a digital tapedeck (when i do, arecord is fine) so i havent used ardour but if a usable daw really has millions of these little corner cases in the UI design and workflow features (which i believe it does, as using samplitude or abletonlive after struggling with ardour or protools will attest), then do we really need all the effort spread out between traverso, qtractor, ardour, and jokosher?
> 
> is ardour significantly better than the others for things like realtime recording track-counts? thats mostly a disk thing unless your coding is _really_ bad, right? which puts us back into UI space (which is why i'll be porting thomas grill's xsample~ to lv2 and writing guis in JS/Lua rather than attempting to add to ardour)

If you want Ardour "fixed", tell the developers the specific things you
think are so bad about it.  It's working just fine for plenty of people.

Most of the parts of Ardour I consider to be bad UIs (ie the connection
dialog) I don't care about (and thus aren't about to fix) because I
don't use them.  The editor and mixer (ie the stuff that matters) are
fine (if not perfect) IMO.

"ur UI sux, fix it now" is probably not going to result in anything
getting better...

-DR-