15 Oct
2003
15 Oct
'03
1:05 a.m.
I believe fully in ALSA & JACK, but I code in what
is
the best for the time being. At present, it's best to
code for both ALSA and OSS. is JACK fully functional
and ready for commercial programs? no.
can you name any commercial audio applications for linux? which of
them do you believe are in a better state than JACK is?
does JACK or ALSA work in other unixen? no. If you have
good coding
JACK has already been ported to OS X, where it seems to be causing
quite a stir. Its inherently portable to any POSIX OS that has an
audio API allowing a callback model (i.e poll/select works, or the
existing API provides a callback model already).
or practices and use good, modular design, changing
the
audio API is easy, so there's no need to look 3 years
its not easy if you decided to use a unix-style open/read/write/close
("blocking" or "push") model instead of a callback-driven (or
"pull")
model. thats why i am always suggesting that people should use
PortAudio if they don't want to use JACK, because it enforces this
kind of design.
down the road! If you designed your program well, it
will be ready when JACK is.
2 years ago, before we started JACK, 90% of linux audio apps were not
ready for a design like JACKs. porting them to a JACK model was not
trivial, and in most cases, has not been done. thankfully, a quick
look at the list of supported apps on the jack website shows that
almost all of the most interesting apps are:
AlsaModularSynth
ALSA Patch Bay
AlsaPlayer
amSynth
ardour
brutefir
cheesetracker
creox
DJplay
ecamegapedal
ecasound
freqtweak
galan
horgand
hydrogen
icsound
iiwu/fluid-synth
JACK rack
JACK timemachine
jmax
legasynth
meterbridge
muse
octavian
pd
polarbear
rezound
rosegarden
rtsynth
simsam
soundtracker
spiralmodular
tapiir
terminatorX
timidity
wine
xmms-jack
zynaddsubfx
so, what are the apps that don't use JACK? (rhetorical question)
--p