i did NOT say that. membership of the MMA is *NOT* required for participation in the proposed public stages of the process or the mailing list. do not make the mistake of trying to second guess ron or anyone else involved in this process. they know about open source. they know about unix/linux. they know about standards. do not imagine that you know what these people are like or what their backgrounds are. that would a serious error and a serious discourtesy. JACK is no better, and arguably less complete, than AudioUnits, although its true that AU requires an in-process model. --p

Patrick Shirkey wrote: Patrick, I'm reminded of Paul's observation of how small the industry really is. Considering the narrowness of the market I'd wonder why the major manufacturers would do anything that might put the jinx on their cash flow. I'm not implying those guys are getting rich, just that they're marketing their wares to a rather small contingent of users. In that perspective it just doesn't work to compare IBM or Intel to the companies writing audio and music software. I attended some NAMM shows at the height of the MIDI software mania during the 80s. The craze has died down now, the inevitable shakeouts have occurred, and people are far more accustomed to using software to make music. Fewer startups appear in this business now probably because there's just no point in going toe-to-toe with the big guns. Now everyone knows the market is simply too narrow. So I understand the protective attitudes: these are people trying to make a living out of an activity we're pleased (?) to do for free. Sometimes I think that "they" understand "us" all too well: open-source development *is* a threat to some livelihoods, even if those threatened might themselves have no beef with open-source, the GPL, Linux, or whatever. Again, the guy writing code for IBM isn't really worried that Linux developers are going to eliminate his job anytime soon, but a person making a living writing audio plugins might feel a little nervous about something like the development going on with LADSPA or XAP. Not to mention how companies like Steinberg and Cakewalk are going to feel when Ardour 1.0 hits the net. No, we're not doing these things to put anyone out of work, but that can be a distasteful side-effect of our own labors. In the context of "We write software to make money to support ourselves and our families" it is completely understandable why no major audio software manufacturer has come across to Linux: we represent a very thin slice of an already thin slice of the pie, and we have expectations and motivations simply not found in those worlds (Win/Mac)far more familiar to audio and music software manufacturers. So is there some solution that would satisfy all parties ? I don't know. We've polled ourselves on the likelihood of purchasing Linux versions of [your favorite Win/Mac music software here], with predictably mixed results. Commercially-available Linux adio software has a rather dim history, so there's just not a lot of attraction (for the commercial vendors) beyond the technical virtues of the platform. AFAIK no LA-based recording or post-production studio is using Linux on a daily basis. We need to score a win similar to the Linux wins in the film industry. A hit song made with Linux software would certainly do the trick (not that I'm a fan of popular music, but it is the big market/money that counts for the pro-audio guys). Btw, if you haven't seen it yet the "Music Gear 2003" mag is on newstands now. The software listings are notable, with a considerable number of plugin manufacturers represented. Obviously that market is less formidable for the new developer than the locked-down market belonging to Cubase, Sonar, and Logic. True, and we've done it for the love of the thing itself (ardour) and for the challenge it represents. Linux development is famous for the "itch/scratch" paradigm, and we're fortunate to have audio developers who believe that a Linux DAW is an itch that simply must be scratched. So again: the Big Guns are compelled to ask the question, "Why should we develop for Linux ? You get most of your software for free, you're sound & music audience isn't all that large, and commercial music software for Linux hasn't succeeded yet [4Front Technologies excepted]. We would have to put people onto an uncertain development track, with not much assurance that we'll make money from it, and we'll face constant competition from established teams of highly competent and experienced native Linux audio software developers who give away the results of their labor. So where's *our* incentive ?". One possible response is: "The platform's technical excellence is enough reason (though not the only one). Musicians are already moving towards Linux as an alternative to the increasingly stringent and noxious licensing terms from Microsoft, and Linux audio developers are hard at work providing musicians with the kind of software they're familiar with (and not so familiar with). So we ask you: are you willing to risk missing this boat ? When the TOC is already low, when the software base is there, and when the reputation gets around, there just may be a mass exodus. You guys might want to have made some plans to be here when those new users arrive." See above. I'm wondering out loud here, Patrick, with no offense intended. You raised some points I feel do need addressed by the major audio software companies, but I also feel that we tend to overlook the dynamics that drive the industry on their side of the fence. Again, IBM can justify about anything they do: they have the deep pockets and the money to fill 'em. I suspect that the same is just not true for many Win/Mac audio software developers. They're also already competing with each other, and that narrows their asking prices. They do face real difficulties accomodating Linux into their plans, some of which may not be very obvious to us. I'm very interested in any remarks Ron Kuper might like to make here. I'm curious to know what he thinks of Linux, how he feels about the Linux audio development community, and if he sees an eventual market for his company here in Linux land. Patrick, thanks for an interesting and provocative message ! Best regards, == Dave Phillips The Book Of Linux Music & Sound at http://www.nostarch.com/lms.htm The Linux Soundapps Site at http://linux-sound.org