Subject: Re[2]: [linux-audio-dev] Question to developers of sound editors.
From: Rick Burnett (destinytech_AT_spacey.net)
Date: Tue Jun 05 2001 - 02:10:54 EEST
If I am not mistaken, I thought that lately we have been working on
standards and interfaces across platforms, LAAGA and LADSPA do just
that. I would like to point out that a majority of the applications
that get started in linux don't ever go to completion. Everyone and
their grandma (including me!) get this idea that "Hey I am going to
make my own this and that and make it on linux so screw windows"
I can understand the fustration of 'What do I need to use to do this
type of audio right now' Unfortunately, Linux is much bigger than any
other OS from a developlment standpoint. There are SO many choices
for every little thing. I cannot wait for Paul's Ardour to be done,
then I can format my Windows machine and get rid of the buggy editor I
use now (Samplitude).
Component reuse is NOT always a good thing. I happen to find that
Paul and Taybin have been working hard on the editor interface in
ardour AND they ask TONS of questions when making important decisions
on functionality. Instead of 'following the mold' they are working
with those who are going to be the first users and seeing what makes
sense.
The only advantage to programming in windows is that your environment
is given, win32 api and MFC on top. If I find another windows
programmer we will have no problem working together. Now, I go to
Linux, I like GTK++ and someone else likes Qt, now we have a problem.
So to wrap up these two cents :) I personally like seperate projects
with different interfaces and having them tied together with the audio
servers. Its like having real studio components and a bunch of wires
with a patchbay. All the devices work and look different based on
taste and use, and the cables all work the same :) routing the signal.
FWIW,
Rick
Monday, June 04, 2001, you wrote:
>> While I'm all for diversity and totally respect that you guys are doing
>> it purely for the love of it, it seems kind of pointless that all these
>> are being worked on seperately. Is there a reason for this indivuality
>> that goes beyond a simple case of disorganisation?
JL> One of my favorite technology interviews of all time was the set of
JL> interviews Byte magazine did when the original Macintosh was released
JL> in the early 80's. One of the software folks (Bill Atkinson, I think)
JL> described how he spent a seemingly unreasonable number of months writing
JL> small assembly language programs that bounced balls around the screen
JL> once the first hardware prototypes were ready to code, before he even
JL> considered planning the software graphics architecture, because he
JL> needed a real intuitive feel for what the hardware could do.
JL> I think some Linux audio projects are really at that point of development
JL> right now -- the point of the projects are to learn how to do things
JL> right, not to make a usable tool ASAP. Much like IETF working group
JL> discussions in the first few years of a new standard. Once there's
JL> consensus on a topic, I think you'll see consolidation happen pretty
JL> quickly ... and untill there's consensus, consolidation is counterproductive
JL> to a good final outcome.
JL> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
JL> John Lazzaro -- Research Specialist -- CS Division -- EECS -- UC Berkeley
JL> lazzaro [at] cs [dot] berkeley [dot] edu www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro
JL> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 03:49:08 EEST