19 Nov
2006
19 Nov
'06
4:40 a.m.
"Ivica Ico Bukvic":
So, if I understand this correctly, there is no API out there that simply
translates common GUI VST calls into any of the libre toolkits which are
also available on Linux, other than the full-fledged Wine implementation? If
so, that *really* sucks.
Well, probably maybe. Its hard to know what GUI toolkits closed source
software use. And it doesn't matter very much either until there is a
big enough marked for commercial vst plugins on linux, which might never
happen because we have better standards than vst for fitted for linux
audio: The trouble of getting various x toolkits to work with each other
is probably more easely solved by using dssi or just making jack programs
out of the plugins. Besides, ladspa is a much more supported standard than
vst on linux, and for most vst plugins, it probably doesn't require that
much work to make them support ladspa as well as vst.
I think it boils down to vst plugin developers not having much interest
in linux audio. Thats where the work needs to be done I think.
19 Nov
19 Nov
5:39 a.m.
I think it boils down to vst plugin developers not
having much interest in linux audio.
oddly they were into BeOS (steinborg at least) when it had 5 users, but not Linux when it
has what, 3% of the global desktop market? does anyone have any recent ubuntu installation
figures? maybe we need to do some kind of BeOS 5.1 vs Linux 2.6.19-rc6-rt4 showdown white
paper, in areas like latency, performance, driver support, and shop it around to Charlie,
Robert, Ron, whoever may be interested. we could rig a tests, make pretty charts, and
encourage users to Think Different.
all the high end 3D software like Maya, XSI, dont seem too deterred by Blender to offer a
linux version..i guess windows audio people are just in the stone ages...
Thats where the work needs to be done I think.
i think the best solution might just be to wait for notebooks to come with Vista and
people wondering how they bought a 486 propel Ubuntu's market share to like 25%. then
things will just magically happen, with no effort expended on our part..
3:08 p.m.
On Sunday 19 November 2006 04:39, carmen wrote:
Step into a proprietary software maker's shoes for a second and
think back to when BeOS appeared to be relevant.
BeOS, at the time, was hyped to non-technical people as "the next
Mac", and those 5 people who bought Beboxen demonstrated an
eagerness to buy high-margin, big-ticket,
so-called "professional" software.
Linux, successful as it is, is hyped to non-technical people
as "the cheap alternative", and those millions of desktop users
have demonstrated an eagerness to post on message boards about
how overpriced software is and to write their own free
knockoffs.
I fall into the latter category myself, and in fact,
I think it
boils down to vst plugin developers not having
much interest in linux audio.
oddly they were into BeOS (steinborg at least) when it had 5
users, but not Linux when it has what, 3% of the global
desktop market? does anyone have any recent ubuntu if im paying $45, id like the source with it thanks :)
so do you. But I totally understand why the Steinbergs of the
world (not to mention the Adobes, etc.) still target Windows
users. It's those three little words that mean so
much: "They'll buy ANYTHING."
Rob
8:10 p.m.
carmen wrote:
Sorry, I guess Linus Torvalds just isn't as charismatic and connected
with the media as Steve Jobs is ... ;-)
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
I think it
boils down to vst plugin developers not having much
interest in linux audio.
oddly they were into BeOS (steinborg at least) when it had 5 users,
but not Linux when it has what, 3% of the global desktop market? 
3:16 p.m.
I think it boils down to vst plugin developers not
having much interest
in linux audio. Thats where the work needs to be done I think.
Well, for them to have interest, there has to be a viable market, and
currently there isn't--we are too small and too involved in the free as in
free speech concepts (please do not get me wrong, I am totally for this kind
of an approach, I am simply trying to depict the reasoning behind this
apparent lack of interest). Hence, the only way they will ever consider our
market is if we find someone who is:
1) sympathetic
2) willing to invest *little* time to recompile their work for Linux
Our job is that *little* is as little as possible. Utopian case scenario
would be that a developer could simply take its source, link it against the
LPGL-ed VSTGUI library, recompile, and be done with it. Then, we would stand
a chance. But this would not be the end of it. Even if we get this far,
chances are what we would get would be commercial natively-compiled plugins
and the next step would be for us to prove that our community has enough of
market potential to make such endeavors worthwhile (namely by purchasing
their product). This, as Linux gaming market has already taught us, is a lot
tougher to happen, however...
Best wishes,
Ico
8:13 p.m.
Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
And Linux people who will pay for it. If the Linux product is free,
their customers may start to say. "Hmmm, why am I paying for the Windows
version when I can use the Lunix version for free???"
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
I think it
boils down to vst plugin developers not having much interest
in linux audio. Thats where the work needs to be done I think.
Well, for them to have interest, there has to be a viable market, and
currently there isn't--we are too small and too involved in the free as in
free speech concepts (please do not get me wrong, I am totally for this kind
of an approach, I am simply trying to depict the reasoning behind this
apparent lack of interest). Hence, the only way they will ever consider our
market is if we find someone who is:
1) sympathetic
2) willing to invest *little* time to recompile their work for Linux 
6 Dec
6 Dec
5:49 p.m.
Hello all -
I'm writing an article for Computer Music Magazine (U.K.) about the
EnergyXT Linux port. I'm looking to get reactions from the Linux
audio user and developer community about it -- particularly with
respect to the fact that this software will not be free and not be
open source...
If you wouldn't mind sharing your thoughts on this topic, please e-
mail me directly at this address: natalia47<at>gmail<dot>com.
Thanks!
-- Natalia
On Nov 19, 2006, at 7:13 PM, david wrote:
Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
And Linux people who will pay for it. If the Linux product is free,
their customers may start to say. "Hmmm, why am I paying for the
Windows version when I can use the Lunix version for free???"
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
I think
it boils down to vst plugin developers not having much
interest
in linux audio. Thats where the work needs to be done I think.
Well, for them to
have interest, there has to be a viable market, and
currently there isn't--we are too small and too involved in the
free as in
free speech concepts (please do not get me wrong, I am totally for
this kind
of an approach, I am simply trying to depict the reasoning behind
this
apparent lack of interest). Hence, the only way they will ever
consider our
market is if we find someone who is:
1) sympathetic
2) willing to invest *little* time to recompile their work for Linux
6564
days inactive
6581
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
6 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
carmen -
david -
Ivica Ico Bukvic -
Kjetil S. Matheussen -
Natalia Rakowski -
Rob