25 Jul
2005
25 Jul
'05
6:46 a.m.
Jono Bacon <jonobacon(a)gmail.com> writes:
In the article I clarify the position that
feature-wise, audio
production on Linux is pretty good. Many of the issues that I was
discussing were that some pre-requisite knowledge is required before
you can get started. It seems that to record on Linux you need to have
trawled through documentation, the archives for this list and read up
on the intracies of getting the different parts of the system working.
To me, this seems like a flaw in the offering - surely the user should
be able to get up and running straight away - they download their
package of choice, install and run. Would this not be better?
How are they going to know the name of their package of choice
if they don't read documentation?
To direct the discussion further, I would be
interested in your
thoughts on the following things:
- do you all feel that it is fairly simple to get stated with Linux
and recording? Am I smoking crack? :)
Probably :-)
- do you feel there is a seperation between a
professional and an
amateur? So, the software would 'just work' for the amateur, but the
professional should really know the specifics of the system and how to
set it up.
I don't think this separation is any good. This is linux,
and therefore should be very flexible. The level of expertice
of the user should only determine his ability to dive into the guts of
the system and customize it to his needs even further IMO.
- if you do feel it is a bit tough to get up and
running without
reading up on all of this,
That is the point, I absolutely dont feel reading up on something
is necessarily a bad thing. My hair stand up if I watch
a typical no-clue windows user more or less randomly hitting
buttons in the interface until "something" works. I do feel this
"it has to work out of the box without me having to know anything about it"
attitude is childish.
--
CYa,
Mario