Re: [linux-audio-user] gstreamer, rhythmbox, and mp3

On Tue Feb 06, 2007 at 09:33:03AM +0200, Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
> >
> >I've been warned by a number of Linux folk to avoid GStreamer.
> >
> >
>
> Sure, you can avoid Gstreamer, no one will force to use that. What I
> am surprised about - and why I write this reply, usually I am in
> reading mode of this very useful mailing list - that Gstreamer gets so
> much badmouthing not even caring to check out lastest progress.

i actually checked out and built SVN before badmouthing it :)

the jack sink IS welcomed progress. i think we should all embrace it, as a 'desktop and pro apps can peacefully coexist' solution..

>
> About using Gstreamer playing music and watching videos - well, I do
> this both home and work, and no gliches, no artifacts, no problems
> with Dapper, Edgy and Feisty (Using Gstreamer 0.10 and all aviable
> plugins). What I love about Gstreamer is that it brings unified way to
> "doing things" in multimedia and and it is very easy to structure how
> multimedia works in your application (Pipelines owns). Well, of
> course, I can play multimedia also without any Gstreamer, but there
> must be some reason why Nokia uses Gstreamer for playing their
> multimedia on 770 and N800. Why GNOME uses Gstreamer as backend for
> multimedia apps. It is not forced for you to use Gstreamer, but I
> would suggest to at least try last stable version to judge it.
> Gstreamer0.10 even has pitddl and ffmpeg elements aviable for install
> in Ubuntu /Debian repositories for those who wants to use 32-bit dll
> hacs or ffmpeg library.
>
> For one I can agree that Gstreamer came rather long way. It was very
> barerly usable for videos with Totem/Gstreamer0.8, and RB had lot of
> quirks with migration over Gstreamer0.10. However, this have changed
> very much thanks to hard work of community. In fact, it is second most
> active community besides JACK.
>
> So, Gstreamer gets taken seriously more and more each day. It is
> suitable for your use? It is your choice. I say - try it, because I
> think it is quite changed from the last time guys which gave you their
> recomendations tried it.
>
Received on Tue Feb 6 12:15:03 2007