... feel like doing some [counter]ranting tonight... On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:43:24 -0700 (PDT) R wrote: I think most of them [among the many above] don't actually understand the issue. A lot of them have grown up believing that it is possible to 'make it big', strike a major record deal and all that stuff so they're more interested in the mainstream hunt for fame. That's all they know and anything else smells funny. The idea of giving music away for free is just unacceptable (well, a 30 sec excerpt is OK) and if you provide them with documentation they: a) simply don't understand or b) don't have time to read it (hanging out for a week at some crappy music fest is OK). The media does not talk about open[source][software][music] because even they don't understad it and have no interest in it. Any gatherings of linux users or open software coders/supporters are just considered as geeks meetings not worth any attention. Or simply are discarted as cult meetings. Linux is not advertised enough and the philosophy of open source (as applied to anything, not only software) has an aura of undesirable communist overtones which are still a menace after the progressive fall of some communist states over the past 2 decades. this is so very true Because this is how the system has been working ever since the recordings became available. This is all they know and they also want to protect their rights and their intellectual property. It is the only way they know about. I can agree with this I have met many 'artists' like that. The problem, however, lies in the fact that without a motivation and an incentive to actually find out more, one will have no idea where to start. I know some great artists (musicians and otherwise) who are slowly getting to know the issues regarding open licenses but, otherwise, they're worthy of the term 'artist'. Again, lack of education (about linux and such) and misleading image of Linux (Just for geeks) is the problem. Another problem is that of the 'masters' who produce such 'misled apprentices'. But that's OT. Combine all this shift in philosophy/economy of the idea and the fact that, on top of all this, one must change his way of thinking about computing, change software (and learn new) and reshape all the work habits (if any) and you get one scary situation. side note: BTW, learning a bunch of new softwares and acquiering some new working habits in the software world is a matter of personal growth (at least on the artistic level), in my book at least. And I can relate to that because I experienced it that way (almost). When I first started using linux it was because the software was free as in beer. I don't know why I persevered, must be bacause nobody else around me was using it and I always liked to use stuff that nobody else uses. But it is only thanks to the fact that I commited myself to use software that's perpetually in alpha or beta stage which costs 0$ (as compared to some other beta sw that I used and paid some $400CAD) and the developers that would fix problems instantly (well, overnight), and users that provided patches in a matter of hours (I am totally a non programmer) that I became aware of the free as in freedom aspect of the whole linux movement. Eventually, I took time to review the whole open-source thing and grew to appreciate it. True, up until recently linux was a major pain, especially for someone who's not so computer savvy. I was first exposed to LInux around 95 or 96. I had a PowerMac then and getting linux to work and talk nicely to all components (especially audio) was a major pain. A couple of months ago I went to visit a friend, he pulled out a set of recent Mdk CDs and his G3 laptop and in a matter of couple of hours we were jamming with pd and a couple of other toys. That's a major improvement in a relatively short time. well, it actually is possible to configure linux. I am not sure about other OSs :) That, I guess, depends on your budget. Also, I noticed that people who are not vey computer savvy prefer the tech support that's expensive and comes stright from the company that made the offending software. ok, I think I typed enough for tonight... -- ./MiS _ __ __ (_)___ Michal Seta / \/ \ _/^ _| / V |_ \ @creazone.32k.org (___/V\___|_|___/ http://www.[creazone]|[noonereceiving].32k.org

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:51:22 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote Michel Pollet ported SpiralSynth Modular to OSX a while ago, I'm not certain about it's current status (not owning a mac) but I've seen a screenshot of it in action. Most fltk apps should work well, and once Jack gets ported it should be pretty much just a recompile. Most of the problems I was aware of were a couple of globals in the plugin api conflicting with apple's. dave