8 Feb
2013
8 Feb
'13
1:25 a.m.
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.
Reeeeaaallly debatable...
Michael
________________________________
From: Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>
To: Michael Bechard <gothmagog(a)yahoo.com>
Cc: "linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org"
<linux-audio-dev(a)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.
Ciao,
--
FA
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)