1 Dec
2004
1 Dec
'04
8:16 a.m.
Mark Knecht:
BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months Digi will release
PTLE for Linux. If they did they solve the hardware support problem
and have an advantage over anyone using other Linux tools with home
grown Alsa support. That would be pretty cool. If their normal release
policies applied then for $75 I'd have a 3rd OS to run on.
What digidesign should do, is to make their own specialized distribution
of linux to run protools with, and set up a list of recommended hardware.
Then they would solve various hardware- and software-issues running
protools on a PC, and they would automatically give back a lot
to the linux-community thru work on the protools linux distribution and
getting a bounchelibounch of new audio linux users.
But perhaps they won't do that, because more people will discover ardour
and won't use protools...
--
1 Dec
1 Dec
11:33 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote:
What digidesign should do, is to make their own specialized distribution
of linux to run protools with, and set up a list of recommended hardware.
Then they would solve various hardware- and software-issues running
protools on a PC, and they would automatically give back a lot
to the linux-community thru work on the protools linux distribution and
getting a bounchelibounch of new audio linux users.
That's what I would do -- have to do -- if the decision was to offer a
product based on linux. But, again, they would have to plan out a
strategy of how this product would be
created/marketed/delivered/supported/etc in the marketplace. As it is,
they don't support an OS today, they just use two that someone else
creates/markets/supports/etc. The OS maker has the enormous cost burden.
This could be a significant burden that they otherwise just don't need
at the moment.
On the flip-side, if they look at their overall costs, it might just
prove cheaper if they roll-their-own exclusively. Today, they may spend
a bunch on adapting their products to each new release of an OS (well,
we know by history that they don't adapt too quickly.) They are
dependent on others (MS and Apple) and maybe that, when you look at it
holistically (what new features or product releases have the missed
because of this external dependency? -- thus lost dollars), costs them
more than adapting their own OS.
brad
Mark Knecht:
>BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months Digi will release
>PTLE for Linux. If they did they solve the hardware support problem
>and have an advantage over anyone using other Linux tools with home
>grown Alsa support. That would be pretty cool. If their normal release
>policies applied then for $75 I'd have a 3rd OS to run on.
>
>
They would probably not be able to offer support. I can see how that
would be a blackhole for cost
1:50 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
--- Brad Fuller <brad(a)sonaural.com> wrote:
I'm not sure giving back is so automatic. Has Yamaha
music given anything back?
I own two Yamaha 4416 HDR units that run Linux but
haven't noticed any contributions to Linux that are
credited to Yamaha. To be fair, I wouldn't know if
they have or haven't. I've never looked at a website
to see if Yamaha even says anything about Linux on
these units. I assume these are Linux machines because
Tux pops up during the boot and I was told by someone
that knows the Yamaha developers that the 4416 runs
Linux.
Wasn't there an announcement a year ago about Yamaha
investing five millionish U.S. dollars into embedded
linux? Maybe I just answered my own question. :)
ron
Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote:
Mark Knecht:
>BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months
Digi will release
What digidesign should do, is to make their own
specialized distribution
of linux to run protools with, and set up a list
of
recommended hardware.
Then they would solve various hardware- and
software-issues running
protools on a PC, and they would automatically
give
back a lot
to the linux-community thru work on the protools
linux distribution and
>getting a bounchelibounch of new audio linux users. That's what I would do -- have to do -- if the
decision was to offer a
product based on linux. But, again, they would have
to plan out a
strategy of how this product would be
created/marketed/delivered/supported/etc in the
marketplace. As it is,
they don't support an OS today, they just use two
that someone else
creates/markets/supports/etc. The OS maker has the
enormous cost burden.
This could be a significant burden that they
otherwise just don't need
at the moment.
On the flip-side, if they look at their overall
costs, it might just
prove cheaper if they roll-their-own exclusively.
Today, they may spend
a bunch on adapting their products to each new
release of an OS (well,
we know by history that they don't adapt too
quickly.) They are
dependent on others (MS and Apple) and maybe that,
when you look at it
holistically (what new features or product releases
have the missed
because of this external dependency? -- thus lost
dollars), costs them
more than adapting their own OS.
brad
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
2:14 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 09:50 -0800, R Parker wrote:
I own two Yamaha 4416 HDR units that run Linux but
haven't noticed any contributions to Linux that are
credited to Yamaha.
They are probably using an off the shelf realtime Linux kernel from
MontaVista, who have released their kernel patches. But, if they did
modify the kernel I would like to see their code.
Have you asked Yamaha about it? I don't think the GPL requires them to
distribute the source with the unit, you have to ask them...
Lee
3:12 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
--- Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 09:50 -0800, R Parker wrote:
I think you're correct. At least that's who I recall
them investing money into. The press release stated
that the time for concept to market and ongoing Linux
development justified a switch from the current
solution.
I own two Yamaha 4416 HDR units that run Linux
but
haven't noticed any contributions to Linux that
are
credited to Yamaha.
They are probably using an off the shelf realtime
Linux kernel from
MontaVista, who have released their kernel patches.
But, if they did
modify the kernel I would like to see their code. Have you asked Yamaha about it?
I never have and I don't anyone there.
ron
I don't think the
GPL requires them to
distribute the source with the unit, you have to ask
them...
Lee
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
7:50 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
Hallo,
Lee Revell hat gesagt: // Lee Revell wrote:
Have you asked Yamaha about it? I don't think the
GPL requires them
to distribute the source with the unit, you have to ask them...
It does not require the source code, but if you don't supply sources
with the unit, you have to
Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years,
to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of
physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchangee
(Quote from GPL)
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
12:47 p.m.
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:16:16 +0100 (CET), Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen
<k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no> wrote:
Mark Knecht:
I agree about rolling their own distro. That makes tons of sense for
the Pro Market, Digi knows what people are running and the Pro guys
dedicate a machine to Pro Tools anyway so they don't need hundreds of
other programs.
I disagree about Digi worrying about people discovering Ardour. That's
a completely a non-issue for Digi. They deal with bigger problems
today and win pretty much hands down.
Keep in mind people were saying the same thing about Digi 4 years ago
as they entered the Windows market. Today it's rumored that the
Windows market is larger than the Mac market for the home enthusiast &
small studio markets. Digi stuck with it. Now windows support isn't
going away.
I think coming to Linux (in some form) would be less trouble than what
they suffered going to Windows based on leveraging OS X.
Digi is a hardware company, not a software company. They sell the
hardware and give Pro Tools away for free. What DigiDesign would be
doing is opening another path for selling their hardware. They do not
release hardware specs in any form and their hardware is supported on
Windows and the Mac only by them. You cannot use their hardware with
Nuendo, Cubase, or anything else.
Independent of what the more vocal Open Source enthusiasts here say
today, it's my opinion that if you could by an RME Fireface with so-so
vendor support and run Ardour, or buy an 002 Rack for about the same
price but run Pro Tools, that many, many people would go the Pro tools
route. Good hardware. Good software. (Though not Open Source) Support
from a real company. Compatibility with people working on Macs and
Windows. Able to send sessions to studio's & mastering houses without
worry.
To Digi Ardour is no different than Nuendo or Cubase except that it's
not as well supported with hardware solutions. Digi would be a big
winner in the Linux market since they would be the only real full
solution - the right hardware with the right software.
If anyone was going to offer a full solution in Linux pro audio I
think it's Digi that could do it the best. The question is whether
there is a big enough reason to do so. I think there is. The reason is
Linux not Windows.
- Mark
BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months Digi will release
PTLE for Linux. If they did they solve the hardware support problem
and have an advantage over anyone using other Linux tools with home
grown Alsa support. That would be pretty cool. If their normal release
policies applied then for $75 I'd have a 3rd OS to run on.
What digidesign should do, is to make their own specialized distribution
of linux to run protools with, and set up a list of recommended hardware.
Then they would solve various hardware- and software-issues running
protools on a PC, and they would automatically give back a lot
to the linux-community thru work on the protools linux distribution and
getting a bounchelibounch of new audio linux users.
But perhaps they won't do that, because more people will discover ardour
and won't use protools... 
1:44 p.m.
New subject: Linux/Protools (was: Re: Preach it! [was: Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Behringer
On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 08:47 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:16:16 +0100 (CET), Kjetil
Svalastog Matheussen
<k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no> wrote:
>
>
> Mark Knecht:
> >
> > BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months Digi will release
> > PTLE for Linux
> What digidesign should do, is to make their own
specialized distribution
> of linux to run protools
I agree about rolling their own distro. That makes
tons of sense for
the Pro Market
I'm so sorry to be the one to inject the reality (read: doom and gloom)
here... there's absolutely no way in hell Avid will ever hire/train or
otherwise enlist linux developers to create a whole freaking new
distro.... ever.
They're not in the OS business, and never will be... I was suggesting
the very remote and distant possiblity of a linux-embedded automated
console... not a distro.
I'll bet the house on this one -> DigiDesign will not become a linux
distributor/vendor.
We really should all be throwing our shoulders behind ardour, working to
make a DAW better than PT anyway. Mark, maybe we should raise the issue
of PTLE interoperability on the ardour-dev list again? Paul was open to
it when last it came up... it was just disecting that session
format/file standing in the way IIRC.
-ry
--
Ryan Gallagher <ruinaudio(a)comcast.net>
3:16 p.m.
--- Ryan Gallagher <ruinaudio(a)comcast.net> wrote:
On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 08:47 -0800, Mark Knecht
wrote:
I think it's on the development roadmap. Maybe not.
It's an important feature.
I recently lost a remix and master job because it was
recorded in PT. I didn't really want the job anyway
but if I did it would have cost them to much to have
me deal with it.
ron
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:16:16 +0100 (CET), Kjetil
Svalastog Matheussen
<k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no> wrote:
>
>
> Mark Knecht:
> >
> > BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24
months Digi will release
> > PTLE for Linux
> What digidesign should do, is to make their
own
specialized distribution
> of linux to run protools
I agree about rolling their own distro. That
makes
tons of sense for
the Pro Market
I'm so sorry to be the one to inject the reality
(read: doom and gloom)
here... there's absolutely no way in hell Avid will
ever hire/train or
otherwise enlist linux developers to create a whole
freaking new
distro.... ever.
They're not in the OS business, and never will be...
I was suggesting
the very remote and distant possiblity of a
linux-embedded automated
console... not a distro.
I'll bet the house on this one -> DigiDesign will
not become a linux
distributor/vendor.
We really should all be throwing our shoulders
behind ardour, working to
make a DAW better than PT anyway. Mark, maybe we
should raise the issue
of PTLE interoperability on the ardour-dev list
again? Paul was open to
it when last it came up... it was just disecting
that session
format/file standing in the way IIRC. -ry
--
Ryan Gallagher <ruinaudio(a)comcast.net>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
3:24 p.m.
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:44:07 -0600, Ryan Gallagher
<ruinaudio(a)comcast.net> wrote:
On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 08:47 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
They don't have to. Some gungho Linux guy is going to show up at their
door one of these days and do it for them. (For free!) ;-)
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:16:16 +0100 (CET), Kjetil
Svalastog Matheussen
<k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no> wrote:
>
>
> Mark Knecht:
> >
> > BTW - I truly think that in the next 12-24 months Digi will release
> > PTLE for Linux
> What digidesign should do, is to make their
own specialized distribution
> of linux to run protools
I agree about rolling their own distro. That
makes tons of sense for
the Pro Market
I'm so sorry to be the one to inject the reality (read: doom and gloom)
here... there's absolutely no way in hell Avid will ever hire/train or
otherwise enlist linux developers to create a whole freaking new
distro.... ever.
They're not in the OS business, and never will be... I was suggesting
the very remote and distant possiblity of a linux-embedded automated
console... not a distro.
I'll bet the house on this one -> DigiDesign will not become a linux
distributor/vendor.
<Big smile> The Mac guys said the same thing about them ever doing Windows...
It really doesn't have to be a 'distro' in the normal sense. It needs
to be a system that boots an appropriate kernel and runs one program.
Certainly a bit of support for disk management, networking, etc.,
would be required, but this is not a box that ever does email or plays
games. It's a console in a studio.
The guy I'm thinking of is the pro engineer sitting in front of a
screen listening to a band. This computer has very limited
requirements. Run Pro Tools. Talk to hard drives and Digi hardware.
Nothing more.
Anyway, this is just a wild thought, but I think it will happen in
12-24 months. If it doesn't I'm buying you a beer. (Heck - aren't we
neighbors anyway?)
We really should all be throwing our shoulders behind ardour, working to
make a DAW better than PT anyway.
Ardour has my full support. I'm using it right now - not my Pro Tools
stuff. It's not easy to use, but it gets better and better, and it's
fun to talk to the developers once in awhile and get some feedback. I
never get that from Digi.
However, this conversation really isn't about Ardour vs. Pro Tools..
(For me) It's about hardware support. Under Alsa there isn't any that
approaches what the 002 does, and there apparently isn't any coming on
the foreseeable horizon. That's what's causing Marek such heartburn.
Making Ardour better and better is a great goal, but if it's limited
to old hardware then it's considerably less interesting, at least to
me.
Mark, maybe we should raise the issue
of PTLE interoperability on the ardour-dev list again? Paul was open to
it when last it came up... it was just disecting that session
format/file standing in the way IIRC.
I'm happy to make test session files for anyone to look at, but
there's a lot more to a Pro Tools session than a file that points at
wave files. (As there is to an Ardour session file I'm sure.) There
are lots of specific items having to do with the Digi hardware. Unless
we have some plan to migrate a DigiDesign/fixed-architecture session
file to an Ardour/unknown architecture session file, then I don't
exactly know what good it would do. I have trouble trading sessions
with a drummer that used to have an 001 when I was using an 002.
Reading my 002 files into an Ardour session for any sound card sounds
like it's doomed from the start.
- Mark
2:27 p.m.
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 08:47:08AM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
I think coming to Linux (in some form) would be less
trouble than what
they suffered going to Windows based on leveraging OS X.
Maybe for the core stuff but for the UI, i.e. the vast majority
of the code, they'd have a lot to do.
Unless current protools is already based on some portable toolkit,
which I highly doubt - given the history of the app I would bet there's
a pile of code for MFC, another pile for Cocoa or whatever
it's called, and a pile of reusable cross-toolkit stuff in the middle.
Supporting a third platform would mean either moving everything
to a cross-platform toolkit or adding a third huge pile of toolkit-specific
code.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
12:01 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
It has limited use. They do not expose all the I/Os on the boxes.
- Mark
On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:19:58 -0500, Andres Cabrera
<andres(a)geminiflux.com> wrote:
Hi
You cannot use their hardware with
Nuendo, Cubase, or anything else.
Actually I think you can if you install their supplied ASIO drivers. I
guess they had to feel some pressure before budging...
Andrés
8:35 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Linux/Protools
On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:19:58 -0500, Andres Cabrera
<andres(a)geminiflux.com> wrote:
Hi
Andreas,
Actually, I was wrong earlier. It looks promising:
Digidesign ASIO Driver 6.1.1
For Pro Tools LE 6.1.1 Systems on Windows XP
Pro Tools LE Systems
The Digidesign ASIO Driver is a multichannel, multimedia sound driver
that allows third-party audio programs which support the ASIO standard
to record and play back through the following Digidesign hardware on
Windows XP Professional or Home with Pro Tools LE 6.1.1 installed:
* Digi 002
* Digi 002 Rack
* Digi 001
* Mbox
* AudioMedia III
The Digidesign ASIO Driver 6.1.1 can also be used as a stand-alone
driver (without any Pro Tools software installed), with the above
Digidesign hardware.
If you have Pro Tools LE 6.4 or 6.7 software installed, you should use
the ASIO driver that can be installed as an option during Pro Tools LE
installation.
Features
Full-duplex recording and playback of 24-bit audio is supported at
sample rates up to 96 kHz, depending on your Digidesign hardware and
ASIO-compatible audio program.
The Digidesign ASIO Driver will provide up to 18 channels of I/O
depending on your Pro Tools hardware:
* Up to 18 channels of I/O with Digi 002 and Digi 002 Rack (or 18
in and 16 out with S/PDIF Mirroring enabled)
* Up to 18 channels of I/O with Digi 001 (or 18 in and 16 out with
S/PDIF Mirroring enabled)
* Up to 2 channels of I/O with Mbox and Audiomedia III systems
You cannot use their hardware with
Nuendo, Cubase, or anything else.
Actually I think you can if you install their supplied ASIO drivers. I
guess they had to feel some pressure before budging...
Andrés
7245
days inactive
7246
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
13 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Andres Cabrera -
Brad Fuller -
Frank Barknecht -
Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen -
Lee Revell -
Mark Knecht -
Paul Winkler -
R Parker -
Ryan Gallagher