Re: The True Linux Zealot Exposed!! (The Experiment has ended).

From: Mr.Smith (Mr.Smith_at_Large)
Date: 03/29/04 

Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:58:44 GMT

Kyle Fox wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:27:26 -0500, flatfis wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:38:33 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
>><ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I was wondering about that. Rosegarden, good program,
>>>slightly buggy in the note editing though. (I'm assuming
>>>that'll eventually be fixed, and the workaround is obvious
>>>if one starts hearing "phantom notes": close down the
>>>program and reopen it.) I also need to learn how to set
>>>up 8--- and 16--- octave specifiers, and a double staff
>>>(treble-bass) would be nice, and am not entirely sure how
>>>to do pitch bends, since I don't have a MIDI keyboard.
>>>
>>>Otherwise, it works great on Gentoo for compositions,
>>>especially now that I've got ALSA working properly.
>>
>>But see that is exactly my point.
>>Musicians as a rule do not want to "have to get ALSA working properly"
>
>
> Yeah, all that technical *** about MIDI IDs, channels, effects
> processors, sends, returns, blah, etc, etc, etc, thats all "non-technical"
> stuff. (In other words, new tools, new terms, new problems and skills)

Shows what you know.

Any keen guitarist will know these terms and protocols and you can find
a keen guitarist in just about any band can't you? Did Someone say
keyboardist? Yet another musician who will be familiar with these terms.

They are not new by any means.

These concepts are required learning for anyone whose ever added a half
decent effects unit to there kit.

>
> Now, Windows nor Mac are free of these things either, just go into the
> Propellerhead Reason forums for a clue.

Reason is a smart as it gets. NO knowledge of computing is required at
all other than how to save files. These interfaces mimic exactly how
hardware works.

The kind of hardware MUSICIANS have ben using for decades.

>
>
>>nor do they want to deal with buggy programs that are constantly in beta
>>status.
>
>
> Like alot of the software thats currenly on the pro audio store shelves?

Care to name some?

>
>
>>They want to slap a CD in and be recording as soon as possible.
>
>
> then they just need to buy a DAW and forget about computers.
>

What are you suggesting? Cough up > $15000 for a dedicated digital desk
thats functionality is etched in silicion?

Why do that when you can buy $1000 of software and $1500 of soundcard
and acheive exactly the same result?

Seems a bit odd to me.

>
>>The computer is nothing more than a gigantic tape recorder if you will.
>
>
> Its alot more than that, and you know it.
>

Thats right it is. If you want it to be. But then maybe your a pruist
and thats all you looking for. In which case ardour would do you fine.

The thing is that most people see the addition possibilities offered by
the range available to Windows and Mac OS's that they quickly expand
their talents

>
>>This is one reason why the Mac appeals to musicians.
>
>
> Trendy.

Yeah, thats the reason for it.

>
>
>>Plug it in and it works.
>
>
> Occasionally.

Many more times than Linux.

>
>
> The Mac appeals because musicians because it was the early lead in the pro
> audio market, and thus most musicians like their macs and stick with them.
>

Thats true for many people.

>
>>Linux is a mess as far as multimedia is concerned.
>
>
> No more than Windows.

A million time more than windows. Linux has no continuity in the
avaiable applications. Flimsey agreement toward protocols. Poor or no
integration between applications.

Thats a mess when you trying TO GET THINGS DONE.

>
>
>>All the different sound systems is one problem.
>
>
> Not really, I get along fine with just ALSA and Jack. You just have to
> pick one and go with it instead of trying to use all of them.
>

Then what do you do when one tool does something you want but it doesn't
work with the protocol youve chosen?

Your fucked. Go without.

>
>>Programs that are difficult to set up is
>>another problem and the lack of professional quality softsynths and
>>plugin effects is yet another problem.
>
>
> Perhaps you shouldint be asking for "pro quality" synths for free.
>
> Go try and get Cakewalk, Cubase or Propellerheads to give you their
> software fro free.

Don't use the fact that the Linux tools are free as an excuse for the
low quality and lack of finish.

It belittles the developers. When you look at Linux as an OS the
developers involved ahve demonstrated that this is not a factor.

Linux audio developers do OK work. Its juts that there is SO much more
work to be done to cath up to what can be done on Windows and Mac desktops.

>
>
>>Linux is coming along however and there are several projects that are
>>addressing these problems.
>
>
> Yes, and with the wintrolls jumping on it soo much it, and the pro video
> issue, will be beaten to death so hard that it would be diffcult for Apple
> or Microsoft to produce something better.
>
> - Kay
>