Re: [LAU] A year of Linux Audio revisited - would like to know your oppinion

On Thursday 13 December 2007 04:53:20 Pieter Palmers wrote:
> Paul Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 12:49 +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
> >> The only project that seems to be able to break this circle is Ardour.
> >
> > Lets give some props to Rosegarden here. Chris and the rest of the RG
> > gang have followed a totally different path in every sense, yet RG seems
> > to be developing quite well and meeting its design goals pretty well.
> > They didn't do it with any dotcom funds or other "independent wealth" -
> > just hard work and devotion. Even so, yes, RG is probably moving a
> > little less slowly than Ardour and is probably (though not certainly)
> > receiving less attention from the industry. Its still a great project
> > and it should not be overlooked when discussing "success stories".
> >
> > There are others too, that have been 100% successful in terms of their
> > design goals: Hydrogen, FreqTweak, Freewheeling, Jamin to name just 4.
> > Again, this developed under very different models than Ardour, so I
> > think its dangerous to over-generalize here.
>
> I did not meant to devalue any of the LAD programs. I personally think
> we have an incredible set of tools that can provide you with everything
> you need. In some cases tt's not as polished as in the commercial world,
> which IMHO is not a bad thing by definition. Not having a bunch of
> pre-made presets encourages you to learn what you're doing, which in
> it's turn can lead to a better ability to implement your musical ideas.
> But that's another discussion.
>
> The point I was trying to make is that apparently only one project seems
> to be able to create some sort of revenue for it's developer(s). At
> least as far as I know the stories (please indulge me). If I'm not wrong
> , again please correct me if so, all programs you mention have been
> developed either in spare time, or in some sort of research environment.

I think Rivendell was a funded development project. If I understand things
properly, it was in house but GPL which then got outside developer(s?) who
are "in house" in other houses and now, some of the original people have set
up an outside company to do further development and professional support.

It is a nice app too and the devs seem like nice people.
>
> I think they have a large 'value' and could be able to be
> self-supportive. The question is "why aren't they?".

Further questions in that vein:

Do they want to be?

If so, how can we help them be?

>
> As a though experiment on the side, possible pouring a jar of petrol
> here...
>
> I wonder what would happen if we would port these applications to the
> Windows platform.

There are probably valid reasons for and against.

One valid reason against is probably the "killer app" play. If we end up with
one that only works on linux, could it drive linux adoption? I think the
reason we want the numbers is for network effects and specifically for
hardware support.

Another possible valid reason against is taking extra valuable developer time.

A reason for to counteract that last one is if a developer is interested in
the port.

Another valid reason for is writing clean and portable code from the break. (I
am far from expert enough here to know if this one really makes sense.)

> It's not something new, e.g. Mixxx, Hydrogen, recently
> LinuxSampler. Considering the fact that Qt4 GPL is available for
> windows, and that jackdmp is also ported to windows one could argue that
> technically it's not that hard. The userbase is potentially much larger,
> increasing both the potential developers, but more important, increasing
> the base for a service based business model.

Business model... This goes back to my first question above - Do they want to
be?

Perhaps they would like to be but can't figure out a way to be funded without
being in business and they don't actually want to be in business.

I ran my own one man business for many years but finally shut it down because
I got tired of the "business side" while I still loved the income producing
work I was doing. So I jumped full time into a part time / full time job I
was also working at for many years and now just moonlight once in a while
outside of that.

During the years I was running the business and not likeing parts of it, I was
searching for people in the same boat to pool together and hire a "boss" to
run our business and us on a day to day basis. It never panned out. I still
think the idea had potential but may have been ahead of its time for my
country.

So, does someone want to set up an umbrella business to shelter all fo these
projects who would like an income but don't want to run a business...

> After all, FruityLoops started out as a pretty simple $20 shareware app
> (hydrogen can do more), with a perfectly working crack circulating (I
> assume :). But still people paid for it, allowing it to grow into what
> it now is.
> Another thought is "why is the almost equally closed OSX more accepted
> than Windows?"

Here's some jet fuel to throw in on top of the petrol...

Because peole see apple as cool and the underdog and because darwin did the
work apple intended?

Actaully, not meant to stir the fire, just pretending. Apple does go way back
with music, graphics, and publishing. The group I work for now owns a
national daily newspaper in my country. They are still primarily a mac shop
due to apple's historic play in this market. It would not surprise me if they
still get "bump" from their history in the music field as well.
>
> Note that I'm not advocating anything, I'm simply exercising my creative
> thinking here. I'm very interested in the responses...
>
> Greets,
>
> Pieter

all the best,

drew

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Thu Dec 13 16:15:02 2007