4 Feb
2003
4 Feb
'03
7:13 p.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 07:10:39 -0500, Taybin Rutkin
wrote:
Agreed. Different apps have different needs. Jack is probably serious
overkill
for a lot of simple audio playback needs, but something like MAS [isn't
that also
the name of MOTU's plugin API?] is obviously not serviceable for
pro-quality
work. I agree though that a MAS backend for JACK might be a good thing.
-dgm
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Abramo Bagnara wrote:
I'd say that AMS, SSM, pd and ecasound mark it as a success :)
Despite that I strongly think that an audio server
that not permit in
native way the traditional approach (what you call blocking approach)
will never achieve the driving role we'd need.
Well, given that Ardour, amsynth, alsaplayer, and freqtweak all use jack,
I'm pretty happy with how it is. It doesn't need to gain any more
applications to be considered a success as far as I'm concerned.
I dont see how nayone could dismiss JACK in this
respect, it does one thing
(lowlatency synced audio for music creation apps) and it does it very well.
- Steve