Re: [linux-audio-user] (OSS vs. RME) vs. (OSS + RME) [slightly OT]

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

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] (OSS vs. RME) vs. (OSS + RME) [slightly OT]
From: Dave Robillard (drobilla_AT_connect.carleton.ca)
Date: Fri Dec 17 2004 - 16:10:50 EET


On Thu, 2004-16-12 at 22:54 -0600, vord wrote:
> Please excuse my choice of words; but, Dave, it doesnt make much sense
> to say you disagree when you dont understand in the first place.
>
> Providing Linux compatability is the issue here, and it boils down to
> how badly you want it. Personally Im not willing to bend over in the
> least ... thats not what this approach is about. It is about proving a
> point to hardware manufacturers, like RME, who [to their own
> disadvantage, mind you] ignore users of opensource operating systems.
> They mistakenly believe there is no money to be made here ... we can
> bitch about it or we can prove it. You've made your choice; now stand
> aside.

So, you want to make companies support open-source operating systems by
turning those systems into proprietary operating systems? Well then
they wouldn't be supporting open-source operating systems would they?

If you want a proprietary unix-based OS for music work, go use Mac OSX.
It has all the "compatibility" you could want, and more (and far, far,
far more music applications than Linux). Then those of us who care
about the future of Linux don't have to watch it be slowly destroyed by
people like you trying to "help".

Seriously. I'm not trying to be mean, or critical, or whatever. If you
don't care about the freedom of it, why use Linux? Relatively speaking
it's a crap audio production OS. Go use OSX, (or even, ugh, Windows) -
it has what you want.

If you do have reasons for using Linux, they stem directly from the
open-source nature of it, whether you realize it now or not.

-DR-


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 17 2004 - 16:17:07 EET