Re: [LAU] PulseAudio

On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 10:04 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> So PulseAudio is by design not _the_ solution for
> sound on the desktop. It is just another middle-layer for sound.

reasonable people might choose to disagree about this.

> And why
> should a desktop-app-dev adopt PulseAudio when he would have to use another
> api/lib for video? Isn't it better to use one api/lib that has both and even
> does them in sync?

gstreamer exists for this purpose. whether its the right solution is not
a question i am in a position to address. it is, however, vitally
important to distinguish between APIs intended for:

        * intra-application management of media streams
        * delivery/receipt of media streams to endpoints outside
            of an application

PulseAudio is aimed at the second task; gstreamer is aimed at the first.
my impression is that Phonon is attempting to cover both. good? bad?
*you* decide :)

> And PulseAudio claims to unify both desktop-needs and pro-audio-needs. Another
> place it will fail big time. Because it will never be good enough to have
> ardour use PulseAudio. (Hint: Jack was designed for ardour...)

Lennart (PA's author) fully understands how and why JACK is different
from PulseAudio, and has long term to plans to try to provide
jack-server functionality within pulse. PA also has a JACK backend
already, so that you can use "desktop" apps while JACK is running and
still hear them.

--p

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Mon Apr 14 16:15:04 2008