Re: [linux-audio-dev] ALSA vs OSS/free

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ALSA vs OSS/free
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 23:25:34 EET


>heh. Imagine they _did_ port it.. we'd have to come up with a new word to repl
>ace the "Linux" in ALSA... ;-)

ALSA has been (or was) adopted by QNX, though they started with 0.5.X,
which was probably a mistake.

>quite. especially since linux is capturing most of the unix market share (esp.
> on the desktop). ALSA on MacOS X anyone? or dare i say Win**?

no point doing it on Mac OS X. CoreAudio is a better API for
application developers, and its also has a really nice HAL layer for
device driver authors to conform to. writing a PCI device driver for
CoreAudio looks like about 1 day's work (though to be fair, ALSA isn't
much more).

as i've said many times, i think its a mistake to write apps for ALSA
unless they are generic audio engines. we need to be using APIs that
represent the correct programming model and don't expose
hardware-level details unless absolutely necessary. thats what
CoreAudio is about (as well as several other similar APIs).

--p


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 23:18:44 EET